Itxa/6944/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 19 Mumbai v. Ketki M. Patel
High Court
29 Nov 2011 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/6944/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 19 Mumbai v. Ketki M. Patel
Date of order
29 Nov 2011
Assessment year(s)
2004-05
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Itxa/6944/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 19 Mumbai v. Ketki M. Patel, the High Court (2011) decided the matter.
Decision: The appeal is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
sas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.6944 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax-19, Mumbai..Appellant.
V/s.
Mrs. Ketki M. Patel
..Respondent.
Mr. Suresh Kumar for the appellant.None for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND A.R. JOSHI, JJ.DATED : 29TH NOVEMBER, 2011
P.C. :-
Perusal of the impugned order of the ITAT dated 6-8-2009 in ITA No.5108/M/08 relating to AY 2004-05, it is seen that the ITAT has restored the question raised in this appeal to the file of the assessing officer for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Since the ITAT has restored the issue for fresh consideration, we are not inclined to entertain the appeal. However, the assessing officer while passing fresh order as per the directions of the ITAT shall take into consideration the judgment of this Court in the case of CIT V/s. Smt. Manjula J. Shah [Income Tax Appeal No.3378 of 2010] decided on 11[th] October, 2011. The appeal is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
(A.R. JOSHI, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, 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