Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax ... App v...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax ... App v. M/S.panther Investrade Ltd

High Court 27 Jan 2009 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax ... App v. M/S.panther Investrade Ltd
Date of order
27 Jan 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax ... App v. M/S.panther Investrade Ltd, the High Court (2009) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Issue: Though such ground was not raised in the questions of law as formulated, ITAT while answering the issue ought to have recorded first a findings of fact as to whether the facts of the present appeal are similar to those two other matters where the issues were same.

Decision: Considering the above, the impugned order is set aside.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

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. 580 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant The Commissioner of Income Tax ... App Versus M/s.Panther Investrade Ltd. ... Respondent Mr. U.P. Patki with Ms.Anamika Malhotra for the Appellant. Mr. A.K. Jasani for Respondent. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, &R.S. MOHITE, JJ. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, & R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATED: JANUARY 27, 2009P.C. DATED: JANUARY 27, 2009 P.C. . The Revenue has framed the questions as set out in Para 5 of the appeal memo. We find that the assessee had approached the I.T.A.T. against the order of the C.I.T.(Appeal). CIT (A) in its order had held that the assessee was not in a position to explain the journal entries in the matter of transfer of funds. . The Tribunal proceeded on the basis of the findings recorded by it in case of some sister concerns. Applying the ratio in those matters to the present appeal, CIT (A) in Para 9 observed that since the issue is covered by those matters. The appeal as field by the Assessee allowed.This order is subject matter of the present appeal. . We are in agreement with the contentions raised on behalf of the Revenue. Though such ground was not raised in the questions of law as formulated, ITAT while answering the issue ought to have recorded first a findings of fact as to whether the facts of the present appeal are similar to those two other matters where the issues were same. The CIT had recorded a finding in favour of the revenue. While reversing the findings of CIT (A) the tribunal was bound to give reasons which in the present case has not been done. . Considering the above, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded back to he tribunal for reconsidering the issue and thereafter applying the principles which had been followed in the other cases, if in law they are so applicable. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (R.S. MOHITE, J.)(F.I. REBELLO,J.) (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I. REBELLO,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