The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Fifty Fifty Finance & Management
High Court
17 Feb 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Fifty Fifty Finance & Management
Date of order
17 Feb 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Fifty Fifty Finance & Management, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Considering the above, there is no merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed.
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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1057 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant
Versus
Fifty Fifty Finance & Management.. Respondent
Mr.Suresh Kumar for the Appellant.
Mrs. Usha I. Dalal for Respondent.
CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, &
R.S. MOHITE, JJ.
DATED: FEBRUARY 17, 2009
P.C.
P.C.
. The appeal is in respect of Assessment year
2001-2002. The question of law as raised by the
revenue is contained in Para 4 of the appeal memo.
In our opinion, would be covered by the ratio of the
judgment of this court reported in 219 CTR 409.
Considering the above, there is no merit in this
appeal which is accordingly dismissed.
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)(F.I. REBELLO,J.)
(F.I. REBELLO,J.)
(R.S. MOHITE, 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