Case LawHigh Court › M/S Synergy Impex v. Income Tax Officer,...

M/S Synergy Impex v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 18(2)(2) And Another

High Court 17 Sep 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
M/S Synergy Impex v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 18(2)(2) And Another
Date of order
17 Sep 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In M/S Synergy Impex v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 18(2)(2) And Another, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.

Decision: However, on aconcession given by the learned Counsel appearing for the RespondentDepartment, the order of the Tribunal dated 29[th] July 2005 is set aside.

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 APPEAL NO. 5 OF 2006 M/s Synergy Impex Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 18(2)(2) and another ).. Appellant ).. Respondents Mr K Gopal for the Appellant. Mr P S Sahadevan for the Respondent. CORAM:SWATANTER KUMAR, C. J.&A. P. DESHPANDE, J.DATED: 17TH SEPTEMBER 2008. P.C. The learned Counsel appearing for the RespondentDepartment states that the order of the Tribunal should be set aside andthe matter be remanded to the Assessing Officer. Obviously, to thisstatement of the learned Counsel for the Respondent, the learnedCounsel appearing for the Appellant has no objection and prays that theorder be passed accordingly. According to the learned Counselappearing for the parties, no question of law arises. However, on aconcession given by the learned Counsel appearing for the RespondentDepartment, the order of the Tribunal dated 29[th] July 2005 is set aside. The matter is remanded as prayed. 2.Appeal disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. CHIEF JUSTICE A. P. DESHPANDE, 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