The Cit-3 v. M/S.hawkins Cookers Ltd
High Court
21 Nov 2008 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Cit-3 v. M/S.hawkins Cookers Ltd
Date of order
21 Nov 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Cit-3 v. M/S.hawkins Cookers Ltd, the High Court (2008) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: Hence, Appeal stands dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
( 1 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.884 OF 2008
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.884 OF 2008
The CIT-3 .. Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Hawkins Cookers Ltd. .. Respondent
Mr.Vimal Gupta i/by Ms.Devki Iyer for the Appellant.
Mr.A.P.Sathe with Mr.Mandar Vaidya for the Respondent.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & V.C.DAGA, JJ.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
V.C.DAGA, JJ.
DATE : 21st November, 2008
DATE : 21st November, 2008
DATE : 21st November, 2008
P.C.
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Perused
the judgment of the ITAT and also perused the Scheme of
Incentive provided by the Respondent. In its order the
Tribunal has clearly given a finding that the
expenditure incurred on the aforesaid incentive tour was
for the purpose of legitimate business interest of the
assessee and as such was allowed to be deducted as
business expenses. In view of the aforsaid finding of
fact, we do not find any substantial question of law
involved in this Appeal. Hence, Appeal stands
dismissed.
(V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(V.C.DAGA,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.