Tailor v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
18 Jul 2005 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hcbgoa
Parties
Tailor v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
18 Jul 2005
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Tailor v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2005) decided the matter.
Decision: Accordingly,Appeals are rejected.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
TAX APPEAL NOS. 2, 3, 4 and 5 OF 2005
TAX APPEAL NO. 2 OF 2005M/s Goa Bottling Co. Pvt.Ltd. rep. by its DirectorShri Nitin Tailor. ... AppellantversusThe Assistan t Com missio n er ofInco m e Tax. ... Respon d e n tTAX APPEAL NO. 3 OF 2005M/s Goa Bottling Co. Pvt.Ltd. rep. by its DirectorShri Nitin Tailor. ... AppellantversusThe Assistant Commissioner ofIncome Tax. ... RespondentTAX APPEAL NO. 4 OF 2005M/s Nectar Beverages Pvt. Ltd.rep. by its Director Shri P.U.Devasia. ... AppellantversusThe Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. ... Respondents
TAX APPEAL NO. 5 OF 2005
M/s Goa Bottrling Co. Pvt. Ltd.rep. by its Director Shri Nitin
Tailor. ... Appellant
versus
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. ... Respondent
Mr. Sudin Usgaonkar, Advocate for the Appellants.
Mr. S. R. Rivonkar, Advocate for the Respondents.
CORAM : S. S. PARKAR &
V. M. KANADE, JJ.
DATE : 18TH JULY, 2005.
P.C.:-
It is conceded by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of theAppellants that the common point raised in the above Appeals has beendecided by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Nectar BeveragesPvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income- Tax (2004 Income Tax Reports385) which goes against the Appellants. It is not in dispute that the ratio of theabove decision is applicable to the present Appeals and, therefore, in view ofthe above Judgment all these Appeals are liable to be rejected. Accordingly,Appeals are rejected.
V. M. KANADE, J.S. S. PARKAR, 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