The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Standard Chartered Bank
High Court
30 Jul 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Standard Chartered Bank
Date of order
30 Jul 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Standard Chartered Bank, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Hence, the appeal stands dismissed in limine with no order as to costs.
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 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.946 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Vs.
Standard Chartered Bank
..Appellant
..Respondent
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for appellant.
P.C.
1.Heard.Perused appeal.
CORAM :- V.C.DAGA &
J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. 30TH JULY,2009
DATE :
2.Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant fairly states that the first three questions are covered by the judgment either of this Court or that of the Apex Court. In this view of the matter, he pointed out that first question is covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of CIT Vs. Chemet 240 ITR 624, whereas the second question is covered by another judgment of this Court in the case of AmericanExpress International Banking Corporation Vs. CIT (2002) 258 ITR 601. So far as third question is concerned, he submits that the same is covered by the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. (1962 46 ITR 144and he does not want to press the fourth question which involves the deleting the additions on account of the interest of Rs.68,896/-. He further submits that so far as question Nos.5 and 6 are concerned, the Tribunal has done nothing but remanded back the matter to the Assessing Officer to examine and allow disallowance of excess interest.
3.In the above view of the matter, it can hardly be said that the appeal involves substantial question of law. Hence, the appeal stands 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.