O R D E R v. Commissionerof Income Tax’
High Court
03 Nov 2017 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
O R D E R v. Commissionerof Income Tax’
Date of order
03 Nov 2017
Assessment year(s)
2003-04
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In O R D E R v. Commissionerof Income Tax’, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA O R D E R %03.11.2017 The only question of law sought to be urged by the assessee underSection 260A is whether the ITAT erred in not directing the assessingofficer to permit deduction on account of amortization of share issueSection 35D of the Act, in line with the previous...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
$~25
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ITA 933/2017ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD.
..... Appellant
Through:Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Gaur Jain, Adv.versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... RespondentThrough:Mr.AshokManchandaandMr.Raghvendra Singh, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHATHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
O R D E R
%03.11.2017
The only question of law sought to be urged by the assessee underSection 260A is whether the ITAT erred in not directing the assessingofficer to permit deduction on account of amortization of share issueSection 35D of the Act, in line with the previous assessment year 2003-04.
The assessee urged that this question was pressed but was not dealtwith by the Tribunal. At the same time, it was conceded that the questionnow stands answered against the assessee for other previous years 1998-99in ITA 320 ITR 420 ‘Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd. Vs. Commissionerof Income Tax’.
Following the said decision, we find that ‘no question of law arises’.The appeal is therefore dismissed.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J
NOVEMBER 03, 2017/‘rs’
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, 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