The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 17, Mumbai v. M/S.k. Mohan & Co. (Exports) (Regd
High Court
01 Jul 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 17, Mumbai v. M/S.k. Mohan & Co. (Exports) (Regd
Date of order
01 Jul 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 17, Mumbai v. M/S.k. Mohan & Co. (Exports) (Regd, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: 1.In both these appeals, the question raised by the Revenue is whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in canceling the re-assessment proceedings initiated by the assessing officer beyond the period of four years from the end of relevant assessment year.
Decision: Both the appeals are accordingly 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 BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2347 OF 2010
AND
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1263 OF 2011
The Commissioner of Income Tax - 17, Mumbai
Versus
M/s.K. Mohan & Co. (Exports) (Regd.)
..Appellant.
..Respondent.
Mr.D.K. Kamwal for the appellant.Mr.Atul K. Jasani for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar & Smt.R.P. Sondurbaldota, JJ.
P.C. :
DATE : 1[st] July, 2011.
1.In both these appeals, the question raised by the Revenue is whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in canceling the re-assessment proceedings initiated by the assessing officer beyond the period of four years from the end of relevant assessment year.
2.In both the cases, the assessment was sought to be reopened on account of retrospective amendment to Section 80HHC introduced by the
Taxation Laws Amendment Act, 2005 with effect from 1[st] April 1998. If the legislature amends the provisions of the Act with retrospective effect, it cannot be said that there was failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts relevant for the purpose of assessment.
3.In this view of the matter, we see no reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. Both the appeals are accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.
(Smt.R.P. Sondurbaldota, 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.