Nma/4392/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 12, Mumbai v. Shri. Mohd.shafiq Vohra
High Court
23 Jan 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/4392/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 12, Mumbai v. Shri. Mohd.shafiq Vohra
Date of order
23 Jan 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Nma/4392/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 12, Mumbai v. Shri. Mohd.shafiq Vohra, the High Court (2009) 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.4392 OF 2008ININCOME TAX APPEAL LODING NO.2365 OF 2008WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.2365 OF 2008The Commissioner of Income Tax-12...Appellant.Vs.Shri. Mohd.Shafiq Vohra...Respondent.Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant.Ms. Aasifa Khan for the Respondent.CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & R.S. MOHITE, JJ.DATE : 23rd January, 2009.PC :1. Considering the cause shown, delay condoned subjectto the appellant paying costs quantified at Rs.5000/- to
be paid to the respondent within a period of six weeks
from today. Office to register the appeal.
INCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.2365 OF 2008
1. In so far as questions of law as framed areconcerned, they pertained to imposing of penalty. TheTribunal after considering the matter has given reasonsas to why penalty not to be imposed u/s.158BFA(2) basedon books of other taxable entities. Considering the
above, questions 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