Case Law › High Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax-26 v. Cap...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax-26 v. Capt.j.g.joseph

High Court 02 Apr 2008 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · newos

Parties

Date of order

02 Apr 2008

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-26 v. Capt.j.g.joseph, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: In view thereof, Appeal 539 (Bom) stands dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.706 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.706 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax-26 .. Appellant Vs. Capt.J.G.Joseph .. Respondent Ms.P.P.Bhosale with Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant. Mr.A.K.Jasani for the Respondent. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATE : 2nd April, 2008 DATE : 2nd April, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. By consent, Appeal is taken up for hearing. Both the learned Counsel categorically state that the question of law involved in this Appeal is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Rekha Hajarnavis V/s Asstt.CIT & Ors. [2007] 293 ITR Rekha Hajarnavis V/s Asstt.CIT & Ors. [2007] 293 ITR539 (Bom), against the Revenue. In view thereof, Appeal 539 (Bom) stands dismissed. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, 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.