Nma/147/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-Iii Mumbai v. Hemal R. Shete
High Court
18 Dec 2007 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/147/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-Iii Mumbai v. Hemal R. Shete
Date of order
18 Dec 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Nma/147/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-Iii Mumbai v. Hemal R. Shete, the High Court (2007) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
(1) NOTICE OF MOTION NO.147 OF 2007
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2447 OF 2006
The Commissioner of Income Tax )
Central-III Mumbai )..Appellant
V/s.
Hemal R.Shete )..Respondent
----
Mr.B.M.Chatterji with Mrs.P.P.Bhosale for appellants
Ms.V.B.Patel for respondents.
----
Coram : F.I.Rebello &
Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ
R.S.Mohite,JJ
Date : 18.12.2007.
PC
1. Considering the cause shown and after hearing
the parties, delay condoned. Office to register the
appeal.
(R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)
(R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)
: 2 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2447 OF 2006
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2447 OF 2006
The Commissioner of Income Tax )
Central-III Mumbai )..Appellant
V/s.
Raju R.Shete (HUF) )..Respondent
----
Mr.B.M.Chatterji with Mrs.P.P.Bhosale for appellant
Ms.V.B.Patel for respondent.
----
Coram : F.I.Rebello &
R.S.Mohite,JJ
Date : 18.12.2007.
PC
1. Revenue has preferred this appeal by contending
that ITAT was not correct in relying on the judgment
of this Court in the case of CIT v/s. J.K.Investors(Bombay) Ltd., reported in (2001) 168 ITR (Bombay)
(Bombay) Ltd.,
(Bombay) Ltd.,
189. Against the judgment of this Court, revenue
has preferred the appeal being SLP (C) 5480 of 2001.
SLP was dismissed on 1.11.2002.
2. Considering the above, the question of law as
framed would not arise and 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.