Itxa/792/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -12 v. Omprakash Bagadia
High Court
13 Oct 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/792/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -12 v. Omprakash Bagadia
Date of order
13 Oct 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/792/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -12 v. Omprakash Bagadia, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
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
The Commissioner of Income Tax-12. ... Appellant.
V/s.
Omprakash Bagadia. ... Respondent.
R.A.Vaishyampayan for the appellant.
Sameer Dalal for the respondent.
CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN and V.C.DAGA, JJ.
CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN
and V.C.DAGA, JJ.
DATED : 13th October 2008.
DATED : 13th October 2008.
DATED : 13th October 2008.
P.C. :----
P.C. :
----
. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and
learned counsel for the respondent.
2. By the above appeal, the appellant is seeking
to raise the following question of law:
"Whether in the facts and circumstances and in
law, the Tribunal is right in allowing the appeal
of the respondent thereby allowing the short term
loss claimed by the respondent?
3. We have perused the impugned order of the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 29th April, 2005
and, especially, paragraph- 4 thereof. It is a mere
finding of fact. No substantial question of law is
involved in the appeal. Appeal is, therefore,
dismissed.
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.