Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 3, Mumb...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 3, Mumbai v. M/S.frank Airways Private Limited, Mumbai

High Court 29 Jul 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 3, Mumbai v. M/S.frank Airways Private Limited, Mumbai
Date of order
29 Jul 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 3, Mumbai v. M/S.frank Airways Private Limited, Mumbai, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1234 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 3, Mumbai..Appellant.VersusM/s.Frank Airways Private Limited, Mumbai..Respondent. Mr.P.S. Sahadevan for the appellant.None for the respondent. CORAM : V.C. DAGA & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATE : 29TH JULY, 2009 P.C. : 1.Heard learned counsel for the revenue. The question sought to be raised in this appeal revolves around deletion of penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The tribunal, while deleting penalty, has recorded finding of fact as under : “13.-------- The Penalty levied against which the present appeal has been preferred is related to and connected with penalty levied in respect of claim of depreciation by the assessee. Penalty levied on claim of depreciation has been cancelled by ITAT. Respectfully following the decision of ITAT Indore in the case of the Assessee in 467/Indore/02 dt.29-12-06, we delete the levy of penalty of Rs.4,16,000/- in respect of insurance money of Rs.10,04,890/- receivable by the Assessee for damaged aircraft.” 2.In the above view of the matter, the findings recorded by the tribunal based on proper appreciation of evidence cannot be faulted. We do not find any substantial question of law involved in this appeal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. (J.P. Devadhar, 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