In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.apex International P.ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In this view of the matter, appeal stands dismissed in limine for want of substantial question of law with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
bgp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3042 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Vs.
M/s.Apex International P.Ltd.
..Appellant
..Respondent
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan i/b. Mr.Ram Upadhyay.
Mr.A.K.Jasani for respondent.
CORAM :- V.C.DAGA &
J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ.
DATE :
14TH OCTOBER, 2009
P.C.
1.Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
Perused appeal.
2.The Tribunal, after having considered the material available on record, and relying on the judgments in the case of CIT Vs. Lok Holdings (2009) 308 ITR 356(Bom)and CIT Vs. Indo Swiss Jewels Ltd. and Anr. (2006) 284 ITR 389 (Bom) has recorded a finding of fact that financing is one of the business activities of the assessee. No material is brought on record to show that the finding recorded by the Tribunal is perverse and contrary to the material available on record. In this view of the matter, appeal stands dismissed in limine for want of substantial question of law with no order as to costs.
(J.P.DEVADHAR,J.)
(V.C.DAGA,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