Case LawHigh Court › Sat Prakash Goyal v. The Income-Tax Offi...

Sat Prakash Goyal v. The Income-Tax Officer

High Court 20 Mar 2009 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Sat Prakash Goyal v. The Income-Tax Officer
Date of order
20 Mar 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Sat Prakash Goyal v. The Income-Tax Officer, the High Court (2009) decided the matter.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
1 MSS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 694 OF 2007 SAT PRAKASH GOYAL .. APPELLANT Vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-12(2)(1), MUMBAI. .. RESPONDENT Mr. Sameer G. Dalal for appellant CORAM:SMT.RANJANA DESAI & J. P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATE: 20/3/2009 P.C. . This appeal is directed against the order dated 23/8/06 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench. Learned counsel for the appellant urged that in the revised return for A. Y. 1998-99 the assessee had claimed loss of Rs.13,45,520 as against the loss claimed in the original return at Rs.16,094/-. 2. However, it appears that the assessing officer as well as the Tribunal proceeded on the footing that the loss claimed in the original return as well as the loss claimed in the revised return is 2 the same. In view of this, the orders passed by the authorities below are set aside and the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer to consider the issue of loss as per the revised return. 3. All contentions of both sides are kept open. Appeal is disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE
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