Nma/1299/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-10 Mumbai v. Hindustan Composites Ltd
High Court
07 May 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/1299/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-10 Mumbai v. Hindustan Composites Ltd
Date of order
07 May 2009
Assessment year(s)
1995-96
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Nma/1299/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-10 Mumbai v. Hindustan Composites Ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: No positive statement is being made on behalf of the revenue as to whether appeal is filed against the order of the tribunal for assessment year 1995-96.
Decision: The appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
AGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1299 Of 2009
WITH
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.307 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income-
Tax - 10, Mumbai ..Applicant.
V/s.
Hindustan Composites Limited ..Respondent.
Mr.J.S. Saluja for the applicant.
Mr.Jitendra Jain with Mr.H.K. Sudhakara i/by
M/s.Khaitan & Co. for the respondent.
CORAM : V.C. DAGA &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 7TH MAY, 2009.
P.C. :
1. Heard. By consent of parties, the delay
caused in filing the appeal is condoned.
2. By consent of both the parties, the appeal
is taken up for hearing.
3. The tribunal has relied on the judgment of
this Court in the case of C.I.T. V/s. Bhor
Industries Limited reported in 264 ITR 180. The
said judgment is still holding the field. Apart
from this in the assessment year 1995-96, identical
finding was recorded by the tribunal in favour of
the assessee, relying upon the same judgment. No
positive statement is being made on behalf of the
revenue as to whether appeal is filed against the
order of the tribunal for assessment year 1995-96.
4. In this view of the matter, we see no
substantial question of law in this appeal. The
appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
(V.C. Daga, J.)
(J.P. Devadhar, 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.