The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 1, Mumbai v. M/S.forbes Gokak Limited
High Court
08 Jul 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 1, Mumbai v. M/S.forbes Gokak Limited
Date of order
08 Jul 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 1, Mumbai v. M/S.forbes Gokak Limited, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeals are dismissed accordingly with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.3339 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax – 1, MumbaiVersusM/s.Forbes Gokak Limited
..Appellant.
..Respondent.
Mr.P.S. Sahadevan i/by Suresh Kumar for the appellant.Mr.Jas Sanghvi i/by PDS Legal for the respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.3455 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax – 4, MumbaiVersusM/s.PRS Shares & Finance P. Limited
..Appellant...Respondent.
Mr.Vimal Gupta for the appellant.Mr.S.S. Shetty for the respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.3481 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax – 4, MumbaiVersusAmijay Labels Private Limited
..Appellant.
..Respondent.
Mr.Vimal Gupta for the appellant.None for the respondent.
CORAM : V.C. DAGA & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATE : 8[th] JULY, 2009
P.C. :
1.Heard learned counsel for the revenue. The learned counsel for the revenue fairly states that the issue sought to be raised in these appeals is covered by the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Income Tax Appeal No.114 of 2009decided on 9/2/2009 in the case of Director of Income Tax (InternationalTaxation) V/s. M/s.Oman International Bank SAOG (unreported).
2.In the light of that, there is no merit in these appeals. The appeals are dismissed accordingly with no order as to costs.
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.
EaseValue