The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 6, Mumbai v. M/S.aftek Infosys Limited
High Court
21 Dec 2010 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 6, Mumbai v. M/S.aftek Infosys Limited
Date of order
21 Dec 2010
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 6, Mumbai v. M/S.aftek Infosys Limited, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 3.The appeal is accordingly 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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2027 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax – 6, Mumbai
Versus
M/s.Aftek Infosys Limited
..Appellant.
..Respondent.
Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant.Mr.Atul K. Jasani for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar & R.M. Savant, JJ.
P.C. :
DATE : 21[st] December, 2010.
1.This appeal is directed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal deleting the additions made by the assessing officer pursuant to the directions given by the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was set aside by the Tribunal and the said order was upheld by this Court in Income Tax Appeal No.118 of 2010 by dismissing the Appeal filed by the Revenue on 6[th] December 2010.
2.In this view of the matter, the additions made by the assessing
officer pursuant to the directions of the assessing officer under Section 263
cannot be sustained.
3.The appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.
(R.M. Savant, J.)
(J.P. Devadhar, 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