In The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central – Ii, Mumbai v. M/S.monika Gems, the High Court (2009) decided the matter.
Decision: 2.Both parties agree that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be remanded back to the Assessing Officer to decide the assessment afresh in the light of the order of this Court dated 12-01-2009 passed in group of matters lead matter being Income Tax Appeal No.1242 of 2008 3.The Appeal is a...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.3513 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central – II, Mumbai..Appellant.
Versus
M/s.Monika Gems
..Respondent.
Mr.P.S. Sahadevan for the appellant.Mr.S.S. Shetty for the respondent.
CORAM : V.C. DAGA &J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATE : 8TH JULY, 2009
P.C. :
1.Heard learned counsel for both the parties. Office objections, if any are over-ruled. Registry is directed to register the appeal. Taken up for hearing by consent of both the sides.
2.Both parties agree that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be remanded back to the Assessing Officer to decide the assessment afresh in the light of the order of this Court dated 12-01-2009 passed in group of matters lead matter being Income Tax Appeal No.1242 of 2008
3.The Appeal is accordingly stands disposed of with no order as to costs.
(J.P. Devadhar, J.)(V.C. Daga, 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