Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/568/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Inc...

Itxa/568/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -3 Mumbai v. Parashakti Trading Company Pvt. Ltd

High Court 15 Feb 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/568/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -3 Mumbai v. Parashakti Trading Company Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
15 Feb 2011
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/568/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -3 Mumbai v. Parashakti Trading Company Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: DATED : 15TH FEBRUARY, 2011 P.C. :- 1.Whether the ITAT was justified in setting aside the order of the CIT passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, is the basic question raised in this appeal.

Decision: Hence the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs (MRS.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

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.2904 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax-3 ..Appellant. V/s. Parashakti Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd...Respondent. Mr. Vimal Gupta for appellant. Mr. J.D. Mistri, senior Advocate with Raj Darak for respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED : 15TH FEBRUARY, 2011 P.C. :- 1.Whether the ITAT was justified in setting aside the order of the CIT passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, is the basic question raised in this appeal. 2.CIT in his order held that in view of Section 115O(5) deduction under Section 80M is not allowable where the dividend is distributed after 31/03/2003. The Tribunal following the judgment of this Court in the case of M/s. Soumya Finance and Leasing Pvt. Ltd. set aside the order of the CIT. Counsel on both the sides agree that similar question raised by the revenue has been answered by this Court against the revenue in the case Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Mumbai V/s. M/s. Nikhil Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd. [Income Tax Appeal (Lod) No.3006 of 2009] decided on 15th March, 2010. In this view of the matter, the decision of the Tribunal cannot be faulted. Hence 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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan