The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri Shrikant G. Mantri
High Court
In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri Shrikant G. Mantri
Date of order
—
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri Shrikant G. Mantri, the High Court allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: As notice of Motion was not served on the respondent we are considering the Motion along with the Appeal itself on the issue as to whether a substantial question of law arises in this case.
Decision: Appeals has examined in detail all possible aspects and that Revenue was unable to point out any irregularity or illegality and consequently the deletion of addition was confirmed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
(-1-)
MGN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4100 of 2006
WITH
INCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.2252 OF 2006
The Commissioner of Income Tax..Appellant
Vs.
Shri Shrikant G. Mantri ........Respondent
Mr. B.M. Chatterji with Mrs. P.P.Bhosale and Mr.
P.S. Sahadevan, for the Appellant.
CORAM: F.I.
R.S.MOHITE,JJ.
P.C.:
P.C.:
. There is a delay of 228 days in preferring
this Appeal. An affidavit has been filed showing
cause. An additional affidavit has also been filed
by Shri Chaturbhuj Das. As notice of Motion was not
served on the respondent we are considering the
Motion along with the Appeal itself on the issue as
to whether a substantial question of law arises in
this case.
2. Against the order of the A.O., the Assessee
preferred an Appeal before the Commissioner of
Income Tax (Appeals). One of the issues was in the
matter of deleting the addition of Rs.1,95,23,910/-
and the other issue was issue of reopening the
(-2-)
assesment. By an elaborate judgment the
Commissioner (Appeals) found in favour of the
assessee. Aggrieved the Revenue preferred an Appeal
before the ITAT. The learned ITAT in so far as
reopening the assessment allowed the Appeal
preferred by the revenue and allowed the Appeal on
that count. In so far as deletion of addition is
concerned the learned Tribunal considered the
findings of fact as recorded by the Commissioner
(Appeals) and after considering the various aspects
held that C.I.T. Appeals has examined in detail all
possible aspects and that Revenue was unable to
point out any irregularity or illegality and
consequently the deletion of addition was confirmed.
There are, therefore, two concurrent finding of fact
on this issue. Nothing has been pointed out before
us warranting us to take a different view or that
the said findings are perverse from which the
question of law as framed would arise.
3. In the light of the above considering that
there is no merit in this Appeal, Notice of Motion
along with Appeal accordingly disposed of.
(R.S.MOHITE, J.)
(R.S.MOHITE, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(R.S.MOHITE, 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.