The Commissioner Of Income Tax ... App v. Shri. Ranbir Rajkapoor
High Court
11 Feb 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax ... App v. Shri. Ranbir Rajkapoor
Date of order
11 Feb 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax ... App v. Shri. Ranbir Rajkapoor, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: Admit on the following question of Law : "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon’ble Tribunal is right in dismissing the appeal of revenue as covered by decision of Special Bench of Tribunal reported in 100 ITD 285 (Mum), despite debt has not become bad?" .
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 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 96 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... App
Versus
Shri. Ranbir Rajkapoor ... Respondent
Mr.P.S. Sahadevan for the Appellant.
Ms. Nandini Alenan for Respondents.
CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, &R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATED: FEBRUARY 11, 2009
CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, &
R.S. MOHITE, JJ.
DATED: FEBRUARY 11, 2009
P.C.
P.C.
. Admit on the following question of Law :
"Whether on the facts and circumstances of
the case and in law the Hon’ble Tribunal is
right in dismissing the appeal of revenue as
covered by decision of Special Bench of
Tribunal reported in 100 ITD 285 (Mum),
despite debt has not become bad?"
. The Judgment of the Special Bench was in issue
before us in I.T.X.A. No. 114 of 2009 in Director
of Income Tax Versus M/s. Oman International Bank,
We have upheld the majority view taken in the said
decision. Independently also, in Income Tax Appeal
(Lodging) No. 1915 of 2007 in Commissioner of
Income Tax Versus M/s. Star Chemicals (Bombay) Pvt.
Ltd. we had arrived at the same conclusion.
Considering the above, the question would not arise.
Consequently appeal dismissed.
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