Case LawHigh Court › Rakesh Kumar Agarwal v. The Joint Commis...

Rakesh Kumar Agarwal v. The Joint Commissioner Of

High Court 04 Sep 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Rakesh Kumar Agarwal v. The Joint Commissioner Of
Date of order
04 Sep 2008
Assessment year(s)
1996-97
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Rakesh Kumar Agarwal v. The Joint Commissioner Of, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.

Decision: Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. Income Tax Appeal No. 645 of 2002 Rakesh Kumar Agarwal ..Appellant vs. 1. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax and another ..Respondent Ms.A.Vissonji with Mr.S.J.Mehta for appellant. Mr.N.A.Kazi for respondent. CORAM: Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &S.J.KATHAWALLA JJ. 4th September,2008 CORAM: Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.J.KATHAWALLA JJ. 4th September,2008 P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. After hearing the parties for some time, both the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant/assessee and respondent/revenue categorically consent to setting aside the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 25th July, 2000 pertaining to the appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue in view of the fact that the assessee has been assessed and income tax has already been paid in Assessment Years 1997-98 and 1998-99 for the amount which has been assessed during the assessment year 1996-97. -2- 3. Both the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and respondent consent that the appellant/assessee can satisfy the Assessing Officer that the assessee has already been assessed and tax has been paid during the assessment year 1997-98 and 1998-99 for the amount which has been assessed for the Assessment Year 1996-97. To put in other words, the assessee has been assessed twice and that there has been a double taxation. It is made clear that the Assessing Officer shall allow the assessee to deduct the said amount if the assessee has already been assessed during the aforesaid Aessement year 1997-98 and 1998-99. Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. (S.J.KATHAWALLA J.) (Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.) (S.J.KATHAWALLA J.) (Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan