Case LawHigh Court › M/S.babubhai Narottamdas & Co v. Asst. C...

M/S.babubhai Narottamdas & Co v. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 06 Aug 2007 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
M/S.babubhai Narottamdas & Co v. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
06 Aug 2007
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In M/S.babubhai Narottamdas & Co v. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2007) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

((-1-)) HVN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 596 OF 2004 M/s.Babubhai Narottamdas & Co. ... Appellant Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax... Respondent Mr. V.S. Hadade for Appellant. Mr. A.D. Kango for Respondent. CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED: AUGUST 06, 2007 CORAM: F.I. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED: AUGUST 06, 2007 P.C.: P.C.: . The question of law as formulated came up for consdieration in respect of the very appellant in I.T.A. No. 7982/B/92. That appeal was dismissed by order dated 7th September, 2004 on the ground that no substantial question of law arises in the appeal. Income Tax Appeal being No. 532 of 2003 was also preferred by the same appellant. It was disposed on 19.10.2004 in view of the disposal of the Income Tax appeal No. 517 of 2002 as also other companion appeals. . Considering the above, we adopt the reasoning followed by this court in its order dated 7.9.2.. in I.T.A. No. 7982.. Accordingly appeal dismissed on the ground that there is no substantial question of law. ((-2-)) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, 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