In Nma/912/2004 Of Athe Commissioner Of Income-Tax,City-4, Mumbai v. M/S Jatta Shankar Inds Ltd, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.
Issue: Theabove appeal is admitted on the followingsubstantial questions of law :Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case and in law, theHon’ble Tribunal erred in confirming theorder of CIT (A) and directing the AssessingOfficer to allow deduction u/s.
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.912 OF 2004ININCOME TAX APPEAL (L) No.298 of 2004The C.I.T.Bombay.. AppellantvsM/s Jatta Shankar Inds Ltd..RespondentMr.R.Asokan, APP for AppellantNone for RespondentCORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &V.C.DAGA, JJDATE : 5th June, 2007P.C.1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. Theabove appeal is admitted on the followingsubstantial questions of law :Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case and in law, theHon’ble Tribunal erred in confirming theorder of CIT (A) and directing the AssessingOfficer to allow deduction u/s. 80-HH and80-I, disregarding the fact that theassessee is not engaged in any manufacturingactivity ?(V.C.Daga, J)(Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, 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