Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax-20 v. M/S...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax-20 v. M/S. Madhusudan Sales Corporation

High Court 18 Sep 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-20 v. M/S. Madhusudan Sales Corporation
Date of order
18 Sep 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-20 v. M/S. Madhusudan Sales Corporation, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Appeal stands dismissed accordingly.

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 BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.826 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax-20 : Appellant v/s M/s. Madhusudan Sales Corporation : Respondent Mr. R. Asokan for Appellant Mr. B.K. Bahl partner of respondent presentin person Coram : Dr. S. RadhakrishnanS.J. Kathawalla, JJ.Date : 18.9.2008 P.C..Heard learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. B.K. Bahl the partner of respondent’spartnership firm. The respondent’s partnership firmconsists of two partners namely B.K. Bahl and his wife Mrs. Bahl who is personally present in court and she has authorised Mr. Bahl to appear on her behalf. . We have perused the judgment and order of the Tribunal dt. 28.12.2007. In the above Appeal the appellant is seeking to raise the following question of law. "The Substantial question of law arises in thepresent appeal is regarding the true scope andcorrect interpretation of sec. 80 IB and above. It is a mere finding of fact. Appeal stands dismissed accordingly. (S.J. Kathawalla,J.) (Dr. S.Radhakrishnan,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