In M/S. K.k. Alufoil v. Income Tax Officer 12(2)(3, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: DATE :- 8[th] August, 2014 P.C.: Having heard both sides and finding that in the case of very assessee on 11[th] July, 2014, we dismissed Income Tax Appeal No.596 of 2012 which pertains to the same controversy, even, this Appeal fails and it is dismissed as it does not raise any substantial question...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
sbw
*1*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.691 OF 2012
M/s. K.K. Alufoil
..Appellant
-Versus-
Income Tax Officer 12(2)(3)
..Respondent
...........
Mr. Nishant Thakkar i/b. Mint & Confreres for the Appellant.Mr. P. C. Chhotaray for the Respondent.
...........
CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARIAND B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ.
DATE :- 8[th] August, 2014
P.C.:
Having heard both sides and finding that in the case of very assessee on 11[th] July, 2014, we dismissed Income Tax Appeal No.596 of 2012 which pertains to the same controversy, even, this Appeal fails and it is dismissed as it does not raise any substantial question of law. There would be no orders as to costs.
(B.P.COLABAWALLA, J.)
(S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
wadhwa
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