Mumbai-Ix v. Mr.b.m.chatterji With Mrs.p.p.bhosale
High Court
14 Jan 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Mumbai-Ix v. Mr.b.m.chatterji With Mrs.p.p.bhosale
Date of order
14 Jan 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Mumbai-Ix v. Mr.b.m.chatterji With Mrs.p.p.bhosale, the High Court (2008) 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
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.339 OF 2001
The Commissioner of Income-tax
Mumbai-IX ..Appellant
Versus
Eversmile Construction Co.(P) Ltd.,.Respondents
----
Mr.B.M.Chatterji with Mrs.P.P.Bhosale &
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the appellant.
Ms.A.Vassanji with Mr.S.J.Mehta i/by M/s.S.M.Mehta
for the respondents.
----
Coram : F.I.REBELLO &
R.S.MOHITE,JJ
Date : 14.01.2008.
PC
1. Revenue being aggrieved by the order of CIT
(Appeals), preferred an appeal before the Tribunal.
The Tribunal after considering the facts of the
case, confirmed the order of CIT (Appeals) working
out profits at 7.5%. In our opinion, this is
clearly a finding of fact. No question of law
arises from the order of the Tribunal. In the light
of that, 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.
EaseValue