Case Law › High Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax Delhi-I,...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax Delhi-I, New Delhi v. M/S Bansal Strips (P) Ltd

High Court 27 Aug 2007 In favour of: Unclear

Forum / Bench

High Court · dhcdb

Parties

Date of order

27 Aug 2007

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Other

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax Delhi-I, New Delhi v. M/S Bansal Strips (P) Ltd, the High Court (2007) 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

* HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI + ITA No. 1237 of 2006 Judgment reserved on: July 16, 2007 % Judgment delivered on: August 27, 2007 The Commissioner of Income TaxDelhi-I, New Delhi ...Appellant Through Mrs. Prem Lata Bansal with Ms. Sonia Mathur, Advocates Versus M/s Bansal Strips (P) Ltd.42, Rajasthani Udyog NagarG.T. Karnal RoadDelhi-110033 ...Respondent Through Mr. Ajay Vohra with Ms. Kavita Jha,Advocates Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKURHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.B. GUPTA 1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2. To be referred to Reporter or not? Not necessary ITA No.1237/2006 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? in the Digest? Not necessary MADAN B. LOKUR, J. The two questions urged in ITA No.1117 of 2006 arise in this appeal also. For orders, see ITA No.1117 of 2006. Madan B. Lokur, J August 27, 2007 ncgCertified that the corrected copy of the judgment has been transmitted in the main Server. V.B. Gupta, J ITA No.1237/2006

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.