Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 18, Mum...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 18, Mumbai v. Marzouk Enterprises

High Court 08 Jun 2010 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 18, Mumbai v. Marzouk Enterprises
Date of order
08 Jun 2010
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 18, Mumbai v. Marzouk Enterprises, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

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 NO.2720 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 18, Mumbai Versus Marzouk Enterprises ..Appellant. ..Respondent. Ms.Suchitra Kamble for the appellant.Ms.Vasanti B. Patel for the respondent. CORAM : Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud & J.P. Devadhar, JJ. DATE : 8 June, 2010. P.C. : 1.The Commissioner (Appeals) has accepted the explanation of the assessee that of the entire amount of Rs.25.33 lakhs paid by the sister concern to the assessee, labour charges amounted to Rs.9.76 lakhs and that the balance represented reimbursement of expenses and advances. This finding of fact has been confirmed by the Tribunal in appeal. In these circumstances, the appeal by the Revenue would not give rise to any substantial question of law. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. (J.P. Devadhar, J.) (Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan