In Nma/356/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-12, Mumbai v. Shri. Ratilal A.shah, the High Court (2009) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: Whether in the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Hon’ble ITAT was right in confirmingthe finding of the CIT I(A) in deleting thedisallowance of Rs.18,32,7312/- out of wagespaid based on additional evidence producedbefore the CIT(A) ignoring the fact that noopportunity was given to the A.O.? op...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
ASN
1. Considering the cause shown, delay condoned. Office
to register the appeal.
INCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.4111 OF 2008
e
1. Revenue is in appeal on the following questions.
Whether in the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Hon’ble ITAT was right in confirmingthe finding of the CIT I(A) in deleting thedisallowance of Rs.18,32,7312/- out of wagespaid based on additional evidence producedbefore the CIT(A) ignoring the fact that noopportunity was given to the A.O.?
opinion, the question of law as framed would not arise.
Consequently, appeal dismissed.
( 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