Itxa/807/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-Ii v. M/S. Unique Estate Development Co. Ltd
High Court
28 Jan 2013 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/807/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-Ii v. M/S. Unique Estate Development Co. Ltd
Date of order
28 Jan 2013
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/807/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-Ii v. M/S. Unique Estate Development Co. Ltd, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In view of the above, we see no reason to entertain the present appeal and the same is dismissed 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
sas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL(LOD) NO.1516 OF 2012
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central II, Mumbai ..Appellant.
V/s.
M/s. Unique Estate Development Co. Ltd.
..Respondent.
Mr. A.R. Malhotra for the appellant.
Mr. Sanjay Sawant for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ.
DATED : 28TH JANUARY, 2013
P.C. :-
1.The revenue has raised the following question for the consideration of this Court :-
“ Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right, in holding that income from sale of flats under consideration was not chargeable to tax even though the entire sale proceeds including possession money was received during the year, merely because the physical possession was handed over subsequently by following its earlier orders in the
same case for AY's 1999-2000,2001-02 and 2002-03 ?”
2.It is agreed by counsel for both the sides that the issue raised in the above appeal is covered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee by the order of this Court in the assessee's own case being Income Tax Appeal No.4767 of 2010 rendered on 6[th ]March, 2012. In view of the above, we see no reason to entertain the present appeal and the same is dismissed with no order as to costs.
(M.S. SANKLECHA, 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.