In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 11, Mumbai v. M/S.jethmalani & Jethmalani, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is thus dismissed with no order as to costs.
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 (L) NO.3237 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax – 11, Mumbai ..Appellant.VersusM/s.Jethmalani & Jethmalani..Respondent.
Mr.P.S. Sahadevan for the appellant.Mr.Atul K. Jasani for the respondent.
CORAM : V.C. DAGA & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATE : 21ST JULY, 2009.
P.C. :
1.Heard learned counsel for the revenue. The issue sought to be raised in this appeal revolves around the question of reopening of assessment after expiry of four years. Concurrent finding of fact recorded by the authorities below, holding that there was no failure on the part of the assessee in disclosing fully and truly all material necessary for completing the assessment. The findings are recorded in this behalf in para 14 of the impugned order. We concur with the said finding. We see no substantial question of law involved in this appeal. The appeal is thus dismissed with no order as to costs.
(J.P. Devadhar, J.)(V.C. Daga, 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.
EaseValue