Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 8, Mumb...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 8, Mumbai v. M/S.tropicate Textiles Private Limited

High Court 17 Jan 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 8, Mumbai v. M/S.tropicate Textiles Private Limited
Date of order
17 Jan 2011
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 8, Mumbai v. M/S.tropicate Textiles Private Limited, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: 1.The question of law raised in these appeals are, whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the reasons recorded for reopening the assessent are not sufficient and adequate to assume jurisdiction under Section 148 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Decision: The appeals are 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

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.4300 OF 2009 ANDINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.688 OF 2010ANDINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.689 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax - 8, Mumbai ..Appellant. Versus M/s.Tropicate Textiles Private Limited..Respondent. Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant.Mr.Nilesh Joshi with Mr.Atul K. Jasani for the respondent. P.C. : CORAM : J.P. Devadhar & Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar, JJ. DATE : 17[th] January, 2011. 1.The question of law raised in these appeals are, whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the reasons recorded for reopening the assessent are not sufficient and adequate to assume jurisdiction under Section 148 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Perusal of the order of the Tribunal, particularly para-15 thereof clearly shows that the decision of the Tribunal is based on finding of fact. No substantial question of law arises from the order of the Tribunal. The appeals are accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. (Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar, J.) (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.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 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