The Commissioner Of Income Tax ... App v. M/S.airline Financial Support
High Court
11 Feb 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax ... App v. M/S.airline Financial Support
Date of order
11 Feb 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax ... App v. M/S.airline Financial Support, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
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 BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 97 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... App
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... App
Versus
M/s.Airline Financial Support
Services (I) Pvt.Ltd. ... Respondent
Mr. P.S. Sahadevan i/by Mr. Vimal Gupta for
the Appellant.
Mr. Sameer Dalal for Respondent.
CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, &
R.S. MOHITE, JJ.
DATED: FEBRUARY 11, 2009
P.C.
P.C.
. The Revenue has preferred this appeal on the
following question :
"Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case and in law, the
Hon’ble Tribunal is right in confirming the
CIT (A)’s order that the issue of notice
u/s. 148 was not valid as the re-opening
was on account of a mere change of opinion
on the basis of the same set of facts which
were available during the course of the
original assessment proceedings?"
. The order of the C.I.T. (A) has been confirmed
by the I.T.A.T. There re therefore, two concurrent
finding of fact as to why the notice under Section
148 was not valid. In our pinion, as there is no
perversity in the said finding the question of law
would not arise. Consequently, appeal dismissed.
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)(F.I. REBELLO,J.)
(F.I. REBELLO,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.