The Cit v. M/S.cheemo Leather Boutique
High Court
28 Aug 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Cit v. M/S.cheemo Leather Boutique
Date of order
28 Aug 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Cit v. M/S.cheemo Leather Boutique, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.
Decision: All the three Appeals stand disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.556 OF 2003
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.556 OF 2003
WITH
WITH
WITH
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.557 OF 2003
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.557 OF 2003
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.557 OF 2003
WITH
WITH
WITH
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.558 OF 2003
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.558 OF 2003
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.558 OF 2003
The CIT .. Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Cheemo Leather Boutique .. Respondent
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan i/by Mr.R.A.Vaishampayan for Appellant.
Mr.Sanjiv M.Shah for the Respondent.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ.
DATE : 28th August, 2008
DATE : 28th August, 2008
P.C.
P.C.
P.C.
1. The learned Counsel for both the parties
categorically state that the question of law raised in these Appeals is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court dated 3.3.2008 passed in the ITXA 367 of 2002
& other connected Appeals in the case of The CIT
The CITV/s.M/s.Metro Shoes Limited, in favour of the Assessee
V/s.M/s.Metro Shoes Limited,
and against the Revenue. In view thereof, the question
of law raised in the above Appeals is answered in favour
of the Assessee and against the Revenue. All the three
Appeals stand disposed of.
(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.