The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Ltd
High Court
07 Jun 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Ltd
Date of order
07 Jun 2011
Assessment year(s)
1998-99, 1997-98
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Ltd, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In the circumstances, appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 475 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax.
Vs.
M/s. Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Ltd.
..Appellant.
..Respondent.
Mr. Suresh Kumar, A.P.P. for State.
Mr. A.K. Jasani with Mr. P.J. Pardiwala for respondent.
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND
SMT.R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, JJ.
DATE : 7TH JUNE, 2011.
P.C.
The Revenue is aggrieved by the order of the I.T.A.T. in holding that the initiation of re-assessment proceedings for A.Y. 1998-99 is bad in law. Perusal of the order passed by the ITAT shows that the proceedings for reopening of the assessment had been held to be bad based on the decision of th e Tribunal in the assessee's own case for A.Y. 1997-98. The counsel for the Revenue states that the decision of the Tribunal for A.Y. 1997-98 has been accepted by the Revenue. In the circumstances, appeal is dismissed.
( SMT.R.P, SONDURBALDOTA,, 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.
EaseValue