Case LawHigh Court › K.k.c. Nrk House, Mumbai v. The Income-T...

K.k.c. Nrk House, Mumbai v. The Income-Tax Officer 18 (2)(4

High Court 01 Dec 2008 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
K.k.c. Nrk House, Mumbai v. The Income-Tax Officer 18 (2)(4
Date of order
01 Dec 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In K.k.c. Nrk House, Mumbai v. The Income-Tax Officer 18 (2)(4, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: In the result, the appeal is dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL No. 1245 OF 2008. ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 1245 OF 2008. K.K.C. NRK House, Mumbai ..Appellant. Vs The Income-tax Officer 18 (2)(4), Mumbai - & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr M. Subramanian with V. S. Hadade, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr K. R. Chaudhari, Advocate for the Respondent. CORAM: Dr.S. RADHAKRISHNAN CORAM: Dr.S. RADHAKRISHNAN CORAM: Dr.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND V.C.DAGA, JJ. AND V.C.DAGA, JJ. DATED: 1st DECEMBER, 2008. DATED: 1st DECEMBER, 2008. P.C.: P.C.:---- ---- 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. Perused the Tribunal’s order dated 25.4.2007. Primarily, the learned counsel for the Appellant sought to argue that the Authority has not recorded any reasons while initiating reassessment proceeding. However, the learned counsel for the Appellant fairly admitted that the Assessee had not raised any objection or sought any reasons while the aforesaid proceedings were initiated. The Assessee also appears to have filed return without raising any objection and the same was also not under protest. 3. In view of the aforesaid acquiescence the appellant cannot now raise the aforesaid issue as sought. Hence, we do not find any substantial question of law in the above appeal. 4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. (DR S. RADHAKRISHNAN,J) (V.C. DAGA,J)(DR S. RADHAKRISHNAN,J) (V.C. DAGA,J) (DR S. RADHAKRISHNAN,J) (V.C. DAGA,J)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 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