The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 9, Mumbai v. Rahil Impex Private Limited
High Court
20 Jun 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 9, Mumbai v. Rahil Impex Private Limited
Date of order
20 Jun 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 9, Mumbai v. Rahil Impex Private Limited, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 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
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.2141 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax - 9, Mumbai..Appellant.
Versus
Rahil Impex Private Limited..Respondent.
Mr.N.A. Kazi for the appellant.None for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &
Smt.R.P. Sondurbaldota, JJ.
DATE : 20[th] June, 2011.
P.C. :
1.Counsel for the Revenue states that though the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has deleted the levy of interest under Sections 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by relying upon a judgment of this Court, the said decision has not been accepted and the matter has been forwarded for filing Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court of India.
2.Since it is not in dispute that the questions raised in this appeal are covered by the judgment of this Court, we see no reason to entertain this appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.
(Smt.R.P. Sondurbaldota, 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