Itxa/5875/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -Iv Pune v. The Malegaon Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd
High Court
29 Aug 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/5875/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -Iv Pune v. The Malegaon Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd
Date of order
29 Aug 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/5875/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -Iv Pune v. The Malegaon Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is dismissed in limini 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 (L) NO. 2016 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax
..Appellant.
V/s.
The Malegaon Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana
..Respondent.
Mr. Suresh Kumar with Vimal Gupta for appellant.
None for respondent.
CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED : 29TH AUGUST, 2009.
P.C. :-
1.Heard learned counsel for the revenue. Office objections are overruled. Registry is directed to register the appeal. At the instance of the revenue, appeal is taken up for admission.
2.So far as the first question regarding disallowing VSI contribution amounting to Rs.2,70,014/- is concerned, the Tribunal has followed the order passed in the case of the assessee itself. The said order has not been challenged by the revenue. Learned counsel for the revenue makes no statement in that regard.
3.So far as question Nos.2, 3 & 4 are concerned, the same are covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of CIT V/s. Manjara Shetkari SahakariSakhar Karkhana Ltd. reported in [2008] 301 I.T.R. 191.
4.In this view of the matter, no substantial question of law arise in the appeal. The appeal is dismissed in limini with no order as to costs.
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
(V.C.DAGA, J.)
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.