Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Mr. Pu...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Mr. Purshottamr. Ralkar

High Court 20 Mar 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Mr. Purshottamr. Ralkar
Date of order
20 Mar 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Mr. Purshottamr. Ralkar, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

(-1-) MGN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.17 of 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax.....Appellant Vs. Mr. PurshottamR. Ralkar, ..Respondent Mr.P.S. Sahadevan with Mr. R. Asokan, for the Appellant Mr. A.K. Jasani, for the Respondent. CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&R.S.MOHITE, JJ.DATED: 20TH MARCH, 2009 CORAM: F.I. R.S.MOHITE, JJ. DATED: 20TH MARCH, 2009 P.C.: P.C.: . The CIT (A) after considering the material on record estimated 30% of the man days have not been not spent on technical services and, therefore, disallowed deduction under Section 80HHE on 30% of the total receipts from Intersocks. The Tribunal after considering the finding recorded by the C.I.T. (A) concurred with the said findings recorded by C.I.T. (A). This being clearly finding of fact the question of law as framed would not arise. Consequently Appeal dismissed. (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.) (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.)
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan