The Cit-6 Mumbai v. M/S.mahindra Ugine Steel Co.ltd
High Court
04 Mar 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Cit-6 Mumbai v. M/S.mahindra Ugine Steel Co.ltd
Date of order
04 Mar 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Cit-6 Mumbai v. M/S.mahindra Ugine Steel Co.ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
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 (L) NO.3123 OF 2008
The CIT-6 Mumbai )..Appellant
Versus
M/s.Mahindra Ugine Steel Co.Ltd.,)
Mumbai )..Respondents
----
Mr.J.S.Saluja for the appellant.
Ms.Aarti Sathe for the respondents.
----
Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ
Date : 4.3.2009.
PC
1. Revenue is in appeal on the following question
:-
(A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances
of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal are justified in
law in confirming the order of CIT(A) deleting the
addition of Rs.12,18,562/- on account of bad debts
without appreciating the fact that such bad debts
arose on account of claims against Government
Department and hence cannot be considered as bad
debts as held by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in
the case of South India Surgical Corporation Ltd.
(287 ITR 62) ?
2. The question in our opinion, is covered by the
judgment of this Court in Income-tax Appeal
(Lodging) No.1915 of 2007 in the case of CIT Vs.
M/s.Star Chemicals (Bombay) P.Ltd., and as
explained in Oman International. Considering the
above, question as framed would not arise.
Consequently, appeal dismissed.
(R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,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.