Case Law › High Court › The Cit-18, Mumbai v. Mr.madhav G.kokane

The Cit-18, Mumbai v. Mr.madhav G.kokane

High Court 25 Mar 2009 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · newos

Parties

Date of order

25 Mar 2009

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Cit-18, Mumbai v. Mr.madhav G.kokane, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Considering the identical facts and the reasons, in our opinion, this appeal also to be dismissed which is accordingly dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

K.J. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.51 OF 2009 The CIT-18, Mumbai )..Appellant Vs. Mr.Madhav G.Kokane )..Respondent ---- Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the appellant. Mr.S.N.Inamdar for the respondent. ---- Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Date : 25.3.2009. PC 1. This appeal arises from the order of the Tribunal dated 11.12.2007 whereby the Tribunal disposed of several appeals. From the said order in respect of one appeal being Income-tax Appeal No.1029 of 2008 came to be filed. This Court by order dated 22.9.2008 was pleased to dismiss the appeal. 2. Considering the identical facts and the reasons, in our opinion, this appeal also to be dismissed which is accordingly dismissed. (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)

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.