Case Law › High Court › Itxa/559/2011 Of The Commissioner Income...

Itxa/559/2011 Of The Commissioner Income Tax -3 Mumbai v. Pams Investment And Trading Co Pvt. Ltd

High Court 01 Feb 2011 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · newos

Parties

Date of order

01 Feb 2011

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/559/2011 Of The Commissioner Income Tax -3 Mumbai v. Pams Investment And Trading Co Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: In this view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.1126 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax-3 ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Pams Investment & Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd...Respondent.\Mr. Vimal Gupta for appellant. Mr. J.D. Mistri, senior Advocate withP.C. Tripathi i/b. Raj Darak for respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.DATED : 1ST FEBRUARY, 2011 P.C. :- 1.Counsel for the revenue states that the questions sought to be raised in this appeal are covered against the revenue by judgments of this Court in the case of The Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. M/s. Castle Investment & India P. Ltd. [Income Tax Appeal No.1557 of 2007] decided on 22nd July, 2008 and Commissioner of Income Tax-3 V/s. M/s. Nikhil Investment Company Pvt. Ltd. [Income Tax Appeal (Lod) No.3006 of 2009] decided on 15th March, 2010. In this view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)

Facing a similar income-tax issue?

Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.

✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA

This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.

Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.