Case LawHigh Court › Mumbai City-Ii v. The Tata Power Co. Ltd

Mumbai City-Ii v. The Tata Power Co. Ltd

High Court 29 Jan 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Mumbai City-Ii v. The Tata Power Co. Ltd
Date of order
29 Jan 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Mumbai City-Ii v. The Tata Power Co. Ltd, the High Court (2008) allowed the appeal.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
(-1-) MGN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL, CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL, CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.50 OF 2001 The Commissioner of Income Tax Mumbai City-II. ...Appellant Vs. The Tata Power Co. Ltd. ...Respondent Mr. P.S. Sahadevan, for the Appellant Mr.P.C.Tripati with Mr. Dinesh Vyas for the Respondent CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&R.S.MOHITE,JJ.DATED: 29TH JANUARY,2008 CORAM: F.I. R.S.MOHITE,JJ. DATED: 29TH JANUARY,2008 P.C.: P.C.: . The questions of law which arise in this Appeal are same as arose in Income Tax Appeal No.43 of 2001. For the same reasons as set out therein in so far as question No.1 is concerned except the bonus part the question is answered in favour of the Revenue. 2. In so far as the question No.2 is concerned, for the reasons given while disposing of Income Tax Appeal No.43 of 2001 this question will not arise. 3. In the light of that Appeal allowed in so far as question No.1 is concerned except bonus part. In so far as question No.2 is concerned Appeal dismissed. (-2-) 4. The question of bonus is, therefore, kept open for consideration in appropriate case. J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.) (R.S.MOHITE, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, (R.S.MOHITE, J.) J.) (F.I.REBELLO, (R.S.MOHITE, 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