In Mumbai City Ix, Mumbai v. M/S. Lokhandwala Premises Ltd, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
/ 1 /
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1111 OF 2004
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Mumbai City IX, Mumbai
Vs.
M/s. Lokhandwala Premises Ltd.
...Appellant
...Respondent
-----
Mr.Vimal Gupta for AppellantDr.K. ShivramA.R. Singh Advocate for Respondent
P.C.
CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & V.M. KANADE J.
DATED JULY 3, 2008
1.The Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Department fairely
states that suggested questions of law have already been answered by the
judgment of this Court CIT Vs. Lokhandwala Construction Industries Ltd.
(260 IRT 576) against the department. Therefore, there is no question ofanswering the suggested questions in this appeal.
This order is without prejudice to the rights of the department.
CHIEF JUSTICE
/ 2 /
V.M. KANADE 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