In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-12 v. Pratiksha Enterprises, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.
Decision: The appeal is therefore,rejected.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.581 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax-12...Appellant
vs.
Pratiksha Enterprises.
...Respondent.
---
Mr.P.A.Vyas, for appellant.None for Respondent.
---
CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED:26[th] September,2008.
P.C.:-
1.The finding of fact that the project was notcompleted in the assessment year 2002-03 and it wascompleted in the year 2003-04 is recorded because thefinding of fact that the project was completed in theassessment year 2003-04 has been accepted by thedepartment in the case of successor of the firm. No
question of law arises. The appeal is therefore,rejected.
(D.K.DESHMUKH, J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, 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