In Tax v. M/S Lazer Detergents Pvt.ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal.
Issue: Perused the question of law which read as under: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in directing for deduction of Rs.23,28,198/- as service charges paid by the assessee to M/s Almanac textiles Ltd. although no evidence was produced to prima...
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. 185 of 2002
The Commissioner of Income
Tax ..Appellant
vs.
M/s Lazer Detergents Pvt.Ltd. ..Respondent
Mr.Vimal Gupta for appellant.
Mr.J.D.Mistri i/b Mr.Raj Darak for respondent.
CORAM: Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &S.J.KATHAWALLA JJ. 25th August, 2008
CORAM: Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
S.J.KATHAWALLA JJ.
P.C.
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the
learned Counsel for the respondent.
2. Perused the question of law which read as under:
"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in
directing for deduction of Rs.23,28,198/- as
service charges paid by the assessee to M/s Almanac
textiles Ltd. although no evidence was produced to
prima facie establish the claim of rendering of
services by the recipient while the onus lay on the
assessee to establish the claim".
-2-
3. We have perused the Tribunal’s order dated 9th July,
2000. From the order it is very clear that it is only
finding of fact. There is no substantial question of law
involved in the above. Appeal is devoid of any merits.
The same is dismissed.
(S.J.KATHAWALLA J.) (Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.)
(S.J.KATHAWALLA J.) (Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN 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.