The Commissioner Of Income Tax-13 v. M/S.mangal Trading Co
High Court
13 Jan 2009 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-13 v. M/S.mangal Trading Co
Date of order
13 Jan 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-13 v. M/S.mangal Trading Co, the High Court (2009) decided the matter.
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
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1024 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax-13...Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Mangal Trading Co. ....Respondent
Mr. Parag Vyas with Mr. A.S. Shivsharan, for the
Appellant.
Mr. A.K. Jasani with Mr. P.C. Tripathi, for the
Respondent.
CORAM: F.I.
R.S.MOHITE, JJ.
DATED: 13th January, 2009
P.C.:
. The learned Tribunal on perusing the
accounts observed as under:-
"Further, there is considerable force in the
submissions of the AR that the account had
both debit and credit balances at various
points of time being of a running nature and
hence the interest payable and receivable
would almost square off."
2. Learned Counsel has also placed before us
the accounts which at the highest based on interest
calculated at 12% will work out to Rs.1,33,933/-.
3. On behalf of the Revenue learned Counsel
(-2-)
points out that the A.O.had no occasion to consider
the same.On behalf of the assessee learned Counsel
draws our attention to the following observation in
the order of the Assessing Officer:-
"Books of accounts , bills, vouchers were
produced and the same have been test
checked."
4. In our opinion, considering what has been
observed by the I.T.A.T. the question of law as
framed would not arise and even otherwise this is
nota fit case where this Court should interfere.
Hence Appeal rejected.
(R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, 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.