In Itxa/664/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 18 Mumbai v. H.h. Late Shri Madhavrao J. Scindia Mumbai, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Appeal is, therefore, dismissed for want of substantial question of law with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 664 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income-tax-,
... Appellant.
V/s.
H.H.Late Shri Madhavrao J. Schindia.... Respondent.
Mr.Kamdin i/b. K.R.Chaudhari for the appellant.
S.D.Mistry with A.K.Jasani for the respondent.
CORAM :V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED : 9[th] June 2009.
P.C. :
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
After having gone through the impugned judgment of the Tribunal, all the questions sought to be raised revolve around the appreciation of evidence and the findings of fact recorded by the authorities below as set out in para- 3.2 of the impugned judgment. We see not substantial question of law involved. Appeal is, therefore, dismissed for want of substantial question of law 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.
EaseValue