M/S.defiance Clothing Co v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2. Income Tax Officer, Ward 18(2)(3
High Court
14 Jan 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
M/S.defiance Clothing Co v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2. Income Tax Officer, Ward 18(2)(3
Date of order
14 Jan 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In M/S.defiance Clothing Co v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2. Income Tax Officer, Ward 18(2)(3, the High Court (2009) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
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 BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 538 OF 2005
M/s.Defiance Clothing Co.
... Appellant
v/s
1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2. Income Tax Officer, Ward 18(2)(3). ... Respondents
Mr.Arun Mehta i/by Akshar Laws for the appellant.
Mr.A.S.Shivsharan with Mr.K.R.Choudhari for therespodnents.
CORAM:F.I.REBELLO ANDR.S.MOHITE, JJ.DATED: 14TH JANUARY, 2009
P.C.:
1. The present appeal has been directed against theorder of the Tribunal dated 25.11.2004. By the saidorder, the appeal preferred by the revenue was allowed.
2. Before this Court, on behalf of the assessee it ispointed out that, as per the subsequent judgement of theTribunal under Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2005, thefifth proviso has been added to Section 80HHC w.e.f.1.4.1992. We are concerned with the assessment year2001-2002. Considering the said amendment in ouropinion, the ends of justice would meet if the impugnedorder is set aside and the matter is remanded back to
the Tribunal for reconsidering the issue afterconsidering the fifth proviso as amended.
3. Appeal disposed of accordingly.
(R.S.MOHITE, J.)
(F.I.REBELLO, 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.
EaseValue