Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/7020/2010 Of The Commisioner Of Inc...

Itxa/7020/2010 Of The Commisioner Of Income Tax- 4 Mumbai v. Shri Ramesh M. Damani

High Court 09 Oct 2012 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/7020/2010 Of The Commisioner Of Income Tax- 4 Mumbai v. Shri Ramesh M. Damani
Date of order
09 Oct 2012
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/7020/2010 Of The Commisioner Of Income Tax- 4 Mumbai v. Shri Ramesh M. Damani, the High Court (2012) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: SANKLECHA, JJ.DATED : 9TH OCTOBER, 2012 P.C. :- 1.The question of law raise by the revenue in this appeal reads thus :- “ Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal erred in deleting the addition made on account of disallowance of bad debts amounting to Rs.,28,59,656...

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.

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

itxa7020-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.7020 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Mumbai ..Appellant. V/s. Shri Ramesh M. Damani ..Respondent. Mr. Vimal Gupta, senior Advocate for the appellant.Mr. Hiro Rai with Subhash Shetty for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ.DATED : 9TH OCTOBER, 2012 P.C. :- 1.The question of law raise by the revenue in this appeal reads thus :- “ Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal erred in deleting the addition made on account of disallowance of bad debts amounting to Rs.,28,59,656/- ignoring the finding of the AO that provisions of section 36(2) and section 36(1)(vii) do not apply in the present case ? 2.Counsel for the parties state that the aforesaid question raised by the revenue is covered against the revenue by the decision of this Court in the case of CIT V/s. Shreyas S. Morkhia reported in (2012) 342 ITR 285 (Bom). In this view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (M.S. SANKLECHA, 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