Case LawHigh Court › The Cit Mumbai v. M/S.tutkuks Restaurant...

The Cit Mumbai v. M/S.tutkuks Restaurant P.ltd

High Court 21 Nov 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Cit Mumbai v. M/S.tutkuks Restaurant P.ltd
Date of order
21 Nov 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Cit Mumbai v. M/S.tutkuks Restaurant P.ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Hence, the Appeal stands dismissed.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

( 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.1145 OF 2008 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1145 OF 2008 The CIT Mumbai .. Appellant Vs. M/s.Tutkuks Restaurant P.Ltd. .. Respondent Mr.J.S.Saluja for the Appellant. None 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 P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant. None appears for the Respondent. By this Appeal, the Appellant is seeking to raise the following substantial question of law:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal erred in upholding the order of CIT (A) in cancelling the assessment order dated 28.2.1995 by holding that the impugned assessment order u/s.143 (3) read with Section 250 without appreciating that the order of the Hon’ble Tribunal relied upon in the order is Section 250 without appreciating that the order of the Hon’ble Tribunal relied upon in the order is under challenge as the revenue did not accept the same." 2. Perused an order of the Tribunal dated 21.1.2003 whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the Appeal filed by the Revenue. The Tribunal has observed that when the order passed u/s.263 stands vacated, the consequential order passed by the A.O. would automatically stand vacated. The Tribunal did not find any infirmity in the order passed by the CIT (A). The Revenue had not even objected that the ITAT ought not to hear the matter. In ( 2 ) view thereof, there is no substantial question of law involved in this Appeal. Hence, the Appeal stands dismissed. (V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan