Case Law › High Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri....

The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri. Madanmohan Gupta

High Court 02 Apr 2009 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · newos

Parties

Date of order

02 Apr 2009

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri. Madanmohan Gupta, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

(-1-) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 565 OF 2009 NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 565 OF 2009 NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 565 OF 2009 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1884 OF 2007 ALONG WITH ALONG WITH ALONG WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1467 OF 2008 NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1467 OF 2008 NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1467 OF 2008 IN IN IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 955 OF 2007 INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 955 OF 2007 INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 955 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant Versus Shri. Madanmohan Gupta ... Respondent Mr. R. Ashokan for the Appellant. Mr.A.K. Jasani for Respondent. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&R.S.MOHITE, JJ.DATED: APRIL 02, 2009 R.S.MOHITE, JJ. DATED: APRIL 02, 2009 P.C.: P.C.: . The facts and issues involved in this motion is similar to that which was in issue in Notice of Motion No. 564 of 2009 in Income Tax Appeal (L) No. 954 of 2007 which is dismissed by this court today. For the reasons set out therein, there is no merit in this motion which is accordingly dismissed. (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)

Facing a similar income-tax issue?

Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.

✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA

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.