The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii v. Dr. Ranjana P. Joshi
High Court
06 Sep 2012 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii v. Dr. Ranjana P. Joshi
Date of order
06 Sep 2012
Assessment year(s)
2003-2004
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii v. Dr. Ranjana P. Joshi, the High Court (2012) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In the circumstances, the appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.5760 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax-III.
v.
Dr. Ranjana P. Joshi.
...Appellant.
...Respondent.
Mr.Vinal Gupta for the Appellant.Mr. Mihir Naniwadekar for the Respsondent.
CORAM : S.J.VAZIFDAR &
M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ.
DATE : 06[th ] September, 2012.
PC:
This is an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 30/6/2009 in ITA No.635/PN/2007 pertaining to the assessment year 2003-2004.
2)The Tribunal has come to a finding of fact that the respondent-assessee has not concealed the income and declared an amount of Rs.20.00 lacs only to buy peace. The Tribunal therefore, upheld the finding of the CIT (Appeals).The finding of fact raises no substantial question of law. Added to this, is the fact that the tax effect is less than Rs.10.00 lacs. In the circumstances, the appeal is dismissed.
( M.S. SANKLECHA, J. )
( S. J. VAZIFDAR, 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