Walchand & Company Pvt. Ltd v. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle -22 )........ Respondant
High Court
15 Sep 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Walchand & Company Pvt. Ltd v. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle -22 )........ Respondant
Date of order
15 Sep 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Walchand & Company Pvt. Ltd v. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle -22 )........ Respondant, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.
Decision: With this observation,nothing survives in this appeal and the same stands disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INXCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 397 OF 2005
Walchand & Company Pvt. Ltd........Appellantversus
The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -22)........ Respondant.
Mr. M. Subramanium a/w. V.S. Hadade for the appellantMr. Vimal Gupta i/b P.S. Sahadevan for respondent.
CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J., &
A.P. DESHPANDE, J.
DATED: 15th SEPTEMBER, 2008.
P.C.:
1.We have heard the learned counsel for the respectiveparties. The present appeal is directed against the order of theTribunal dated 28[th] September 2004. The contention raised onbehalf of the appellant is that the controversy in the present casewas squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in 1979 ITRVol.119 page 359 and the Tribunal has erred in law in relyingupon the judgment of the Bombay High Court. The fact that thematter has been remanded to the assessing officer, resultantlykeeping all the questions open inclusive of the question ofassessment, and that the matter is governed by the judgment of
the Bombay High Court is not in dispute. With this observation,nothing survives in this appeal and the same stands disposed of.
CHIEF JUSTICE
A.P. DESHPANDE, 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.