The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.travotel (I) Pvt. Ltd
High Court
19 Dec 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.travotel (I) Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
19 Dec 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.travotel (I) Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
bgp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2176 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Vs.
M/s.Travotel (I) Pvt. Ltd.
..Appellant
..Respondent
Mr.Suresh Kumar for appellant
Mr.J.D.Mistry i/b. Mr.A.K.Jasani for respondent
CORAM :- V.C.DAGA &
J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. 19TH DECEMBER,2009
DATE :
P.C.
1.Heard Counsel for the parties. Office objections are overruled. Registry is directed to register the appeal.
2.The dispute in the present case relates to the Assessing Officer allowing deduction u/s. 80HHD of the I.T.Act,1961 to the extent of Rs.1,35,101/-. Since the tax effect involved in the present appeal is less than Rs.4/- lac and in view of the Office Memorandum dated 5[th] June, 2007 issued by the CBDT and the judgment of this Court in the case of CIT Vs. Camco Colours Co. (2002) 254 ITR 565and CIT Vs.Pithwa Engineering Works (2005) 276 ITR 519, we see no merit in the appeal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine 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.