The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Roha Dyechem Ltd
High Court
06 Feb 2008 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Roha Dyechem Ltd
Date of order
06 Feb 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Roha Dyechem Ltd, the High Court (2008) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3128 OF 2005
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1332 OF 2005
The Commissioner of Income tax.
..Appellant.
Vs.
M/s. Roha Dyechem Ltd.
..Respondent.
Ms. A.D.Kango with P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant.
Mr.Rajesh Shah for the Respondent.
CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & R.S. MOHITE, JJ.DATED : 6TH FEBRUARY,2008.
PC :
1. There is delay of 41 days in preferring the appeal.
There is affidavit in support. Considering the cause
shown, delay condoned. Office to register the appeal.
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)
(F.I. REBELLO, J.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1332 OF 2005
The Commissioner of Income tax.
..Appellant.
Vs.
M/s. Roha Dyechem Ltd.
..Respondent.
Ms. A.D.Kango with P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant.
Mr.Rajesh Shah for the Respondent.
CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & R.S. MOHITE, JJ.DATED : 6TH FEBRUARY,2008.
PC :
1. The revenue has preferred this appeal on the
following questions of law.
Consequently, the question of law as framed would not
arise. Hence, appeal dismissed.
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)(F.I. REBELLO, 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