Mumbai City-3 v. M/S.innova Tradecom P.ltd
High Court
12 Dec 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Mumbai City-3 v. M/S.innova Tradecom P.ltd
Date of order
12 Dec 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Mumbai City-3 v. M/S.innova Tradecom P.ltd, the High Court (2007) dismissed the appeal.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2729 OF 2007
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1474 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income TaX )..Appellant
Mumbai City-3
Versus
M/s.Innova Tradecom P.Ltd., )..Respondents
----
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for appellant.
Mr.J.D.Mistry with Raj Darak for respondents.
----
Coram : F.I.Rebello &
R.S.Mohite,JJ
Date : 12.12.2007.
PC
1. Considering the cause shown, delay condoned.
Office to register the appeal.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1474 OF 2007
1. The revenue has preferred this appeal on
questions of law as framed in paragraph-7 of the
appeal memo. Question (A) is covered by the
judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax
Commissioner of Income Taxv. Lazor Syntex Limited in Income Tax Application
v. Lazor Syntex Limited
No.11 of 1999 decided on 11.6.2007.
: 2 :
2. Question (B) is covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Miss.Dhun Dadabhoy
Kapadia v. CIT, Bombay reported in 63 ITR 651.
Kapadia v. CIT, Bombay
3. Question (C) is covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of CIT v.J.K.Investors (Bombay)Ltd., reported in in 248 ITR 723.
4. Considering the questions as covered, no
substantial question has arised. Consequently,
appeal dismissed.
(R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)
(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.