The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 20, Mumbai v. Mr.harvinderpal Mehta (Huf
High Court
13 Jan 2010 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 20, Mumbai v. Mr.harvinderpal Mehta (Huf
Date of order
13 Jan 2010
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 20, Mumbai v. Mr.harvinderpal Mehta (Huf, 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.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2420 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax – 20, MumbaiVersus
..Appellant.
Mr.Harvinderpal Mehta (HUF)
..Respondent.
Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant.Mr.Hemant Jadia for the respondent.
CORAM : Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud & J.P. Devadhar, JJ. DATE : 13[th] January, 2010.
P.C. :
1.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the revenue states that the question raised in the appeal is covered against the revenue by the Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 4[th] November 2009 in Income Tax Appeal No.2040 of 2009, which pertains to the same assessee for an earlier assessment year. In view of the statement, no substantial question of law arises in the appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
(J.P. Devadhar, J.)
(Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud, 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