The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 21, Mumbai v. Ahuja Exports
High Court
06 Aug 2010 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 21, Mumbai v. Ahuja Exports
Date of order
06 Aug 2010
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 21, Mumbai v. Ahuja Exports, the High Court (2010) decided the matter.
Decision: Kalpataru Colours and Chemicals [Income Tax Appeal (L) No.2887 of 2009], 2.In the circumstances, this appeal is disposed of, on the request of Counsel for the Revenue and the assessee, by directing the Assessing Officer to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with law and, while passing fresh or...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1386 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax – 21, Mumbai
..Appellant.
Versus
Ahuja Exports..Respondent.
Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant.
Mr.A.D. Shetty with Mr.R.V. Shetty and Ms.Rita K. Joshi and Mr.Mateen Shaikh for the respondent.
CORAM : Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud & J.P. Devadhar, JJ.
P.C. :
DATE : 6 August, 2010.
1.Both the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee state that the issues in the Appeal are covered by the judgment of this Court delivered on 29 June 2010 in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kalpataru Colours and Chemicals [Income Tax Appeal (L) No.2887 of 2009],
2.In the circumstances, this appeal is disposed of, on the request of Counsel for the Revenue and the assessee, by directing the Assessing Officer to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with law and, while passing fresh orders to have due regard to the judgment of this Court in the case of Kalpataru Colours and Chemicals (supra)
2.The appeal is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to 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