In Roha Dyechem Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner Of, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.
Issue: While admitting present appeal the following substantial question of law was framed on 29th July, 2004. "Whether on the facts and inthe circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in law in sustaining an addition of Rs.2,14,614/- to the income of the Appellant on the basis set out in its order?
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 254 OF 2001
Roha Dyechem Private Limited ..Appellant
vs.
Deputy Commissioner of
Income Tax ..Respondent
Mr.Rajesh Shah for appellant.
Mr.B.M.Chatterjee for respondent.
CORAM: Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.J.KATHAWALLA JJ.21stJuly 2008
CORAM: Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
S.J.KATHAWALLA JJ.
S.J.KATHAWALLA JJ.
S.J.KATHAWALLA JJ.
21st
P.C.
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties.
2. While admitting present appeal the following
substantial question of law was framed on 29th July, 2004.
"Whether on the facts and inthe circumstances of
the case the Tribunal was right in law in
sustaining an addition of Rs.2,14,614/- to the
income of the Appellant on the basis set out in its
order?
3. Both the learned Counsel categorically state that the said question has been answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by this Court in Income Tax Appeal
Nos.46 and 47 of 1999 decided on 28th June, 2005. (Roha
Dyechem Private Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income
Tax). Accordingly, in view of the said judgment, we
answer the question raised above in favour of the assessee
and against the revenue. It may be noted here that the
learned Counsel for the revenue agrees to the same.
KATHAWALLA J.) (Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.)
(S.J.KATHAWALLA J.) (Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.)
(S.J
KATHAWALLA J.) (Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.)
(S.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.