The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-20,Mumbai v. A. A. Kumbhkoni, Jj
High Court
29 Jul 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-20,Mumbai v. A. A. Kumbhkoni, Jj
Date of order
29 Jul 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-20,Mumbai v. A. A. Kumbhkoni, Jj, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 4.In the result, appeal deserves to be dismissed and 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. 92 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income-Tax-20,Mumbai
Appellant
Vs.
Mr. Champallal M. ParikhRespondent
Ms. R. Asokan, for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
PC :-
CORAM : BILAL NAZKI, &DATE : JULY 29, 2008.
A. A. KUMBHKONI, JJ.
second sale and the Assessment Officer took the averageof the valuation of both the sale instances of theproperty.3.The Tribunal did not rely on this and relied onthe assessment made by the expert. Therefore, we do notfind any substantial question of law involved in the
appeal. At the most it would be a re-appreciation ofevidence by the Tribunal.
4.In the result, appeal deserves to be dismissed
and is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-[ BILAL NAZKI, J.]
Sd/-[ A. A. KUMBHAKONI, 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