Tax v. Dr. D.y.chandrachud, J
High Court
25 Mar 2010 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Tax v. Dr. D.y.chandrachud, J
Date of order
25 Mar 2010
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Tax v. Dr. D.y.chandrachud, J, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal.
Decision: The appeals are accordingly dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
O. O. C. J.
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1464 OF 2007WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1465 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Vs.M/s. Krishna Lifestyle Technologies Ltd.
..Appellant...Respondent.
WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1470 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax..Appellant.
Vs.M/s. KSL & Industries Ltd.
..Respondent.
....
Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Appellant.Mr. P.J. Pardiwala, Senior Advocate with Mr. S.G. Lakhani for the Respondent.
....
CORAM : DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
P.C.:
25[th] March, 2010.
Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue and counsel
appearing on behalf of the assessee are agreed in stating before the Court that the question which has been formulated in the present
appeals would be covered against the Revenue in terms of the
decision rendered today by this Court in The Commissioner of Income
Tax v. Eskay K’N’IT (India) Ltd. (ITA 184 of 2007). In view of the statement made and for the reasons indicated in the order of the Court in the aforesaid appeal, the question of law is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The appeals are accordingly dismissed.
(Dr. D.Y.Chandrachud, J.)
(J.P. Devadhar, 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.