The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Rlc Engineers Pvt.ltd
High Court
05 Dec 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Rlc Engineers Pvt.ltd
Date of order
05 Dec 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Rlc Engineers Pvt.ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: In the above appeal, the appellant is seeking to raise the following substantial question of law. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ITAT was justified in upholding the decision of CIT (A) in directing the Assessing Officer to allow deduction u/s 10B of the Income-tax...
Decision: The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL No. 1243 OF 2008.
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 1243 OF 2008.
The Commissioner of Income-tax .. Appellant.
Vs
M/s RLC Engineers Pvt.Ltd.
..Respondent.
Mr J. S. Saluja, Advocate for the
Appellant.
Mr K. Shivaraman, with A. R. Singh, Advocate for
the Respondent.
CORAM: Dr.S. RADHAKRISHNAN
CORAM: Dr.S. RADHAKRISHNAN
AND V.C.DAGA, JJ.
AND V.C.DAGA, JJ.
DATED: 5th DECEMBER, 2008.
DATED: 5th DECEMBER, 2008.
P.C.:
P.C.:----
----
1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant
and the learned counsel for the respondent.
2. In the above appeal, the appellant is seeking
to raise the following substantial question of law.
"Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case and in law the ITAT was justified in
upholding the decision of CIT (A) in directing
the Assessing Officer to allow deduction u/s
10B of the Income-tax without examining the
applicability of provisions of Section 10-B
(9) of Income Tax Act, 1961?"
3. We have perused the judgment of the CIT(A)
dated 10.11.2003 as well as the judgment of the
Tribunal dated 21.11.2006. Both Authorities have
confirmed that there is no transfer of shareholding of
the Industrial Undertaking. In view of the aforesaid
findings of fact, we do not find any substantial
question of law involved in the appeal. The appeal is
devoid of any merit.
4. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
(V.C. DAGA,J)
(V.C. DAGA,J)(DR S. RADHAKRISHNAN,J)
(V.C. DAGA,J)
(DR S. RADHAKRISHNAN,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.