The Cit v. Shri.devji Nenshi Palani
High Court
25 Sep 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Cit v. Shri.devji Nenshi Palani
Date of order
25 Sep 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Cit v. Shri.devji Nenshi Palani, 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.
( 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.988 OF 2008
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.988 OF 2008
The CIT .. Appellant
Vs.
Shri.Devji Nenshi Palani .. Respondent
Mr.A.S.Shivsharan for the Appellant.
Mr.K.Gopal for the Respondent.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ.
DATE : 25th September, 2008
DATE : 25th September, 2008
P.C.
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. In this
Appeal, the Appellant is seeking to raise four questions
of law as mentioned in Paragraph No.4 of the Appeal
Memo. Perused the Tribunal’s order dated 15th June,
2007.
2. So far as the first question of law viz.Question (a)
is concerned, the Tribunal in its order has given a
finding in Paragraph No.10 that the Assessing Officer
has not brought any material to prove that the salary
was excessive and mere increase in salary was not a
ground of disallowing u/s.40-A(2) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal has also observed that there was no
intention of avoiding tax in as much the sons as well as
the assessee were showing income of high bracket
taxation and therefore the order of the learned CIT (A)
in deleting the disallowance u/s.40A(2) of the Act.
( 2 )
3. So far as Questions (b), (c) & (d) are concerned,
the Tribunal has given a clear finding in Paragraph
No.11 of its order that there was no merit in the Appeal
of the Revenue and that there was no material brought
before the Tribunal to substantiate the stand of the
Assessing Officer that the business premises, furniture
and fixtures shown by the Assessee were used by other
parties and in view thereof, the Tribunal concurred with
the findings given by the CIT (A).
4. In view of the above, we find that the Appeal does
not involve any substantial question of law, but it is
based on finding of facts. Hence, the Appeal stands
dismissed.
(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.