The Commissioner Of Income Tax – City V, Bombay v. M/S.reunion Engineering Co. Private Limited
High Court
17 Jan 2012 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – City V, Bombay v. M/S.reunion Engineering Co. Private Limited
Date of order
17 Jan 2012
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – City V, Bombay v. M/S.reunion Engineering Co. Private Limited, the High Court (2012) decided the matter.
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 REFERENCE NO.497 OF 1995
The Commissioner of Income Tax – City V, Bombay..Appellant.
Versus
M/s.Reunion Engineering Co. Private Limited..Respondent.
Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant.Mr.Subhash S. Shetty for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &A.R. Joshi, JJ.
P.C. :
DATE : 17[th] January 2012
1.At the instance of the Commissioner of Income Tax – City V, Bombay, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this Court.
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in directing the assessing officer to grant investment allowance in respect of certain items of plant and machinery installed at factories ?”
2.Similar question raised by the Revenue in the case of the assessee, being Income Tax Reference No.18 of 1990 have been returned unanswered by order dated 5[th] July 2005 in the light of the judgment of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Pithwa Engineering
Works reported in (2005) 276 ITR 519 (Bom) as the tax effect is less than
the monetary limits prescribed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes.
3.In this view of the matter, the Reference is returned unanswered.
(A.R. Joshi, 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.