✦ Bombay High Court

O. O. C. J v. Anil Nagpal

Case at a glance

Outcome

Dismissed

since no substantial question of law arises, the appeal is dismissed

Provisions considered

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3050 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax-22. Vs. Anil Nagpal. .... Ms.Suchitra Kamble for the Appellant. Mr.Atul K.Jasani for the Respondent. ..... ...Appellant. ...Respondent. CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. June 11, 2010. P.C. : We have perused the order of the Tribunal. The reasons which have been indicated by the Tribunal in paragraph 6 for deleting the addition which was made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are justifiable and correct. The appeal will not raise any substantial question of law, particularly in view of the fact that the Tribunal has observed that even in the remand report, it was not the complaint of the Assessing Officer that the credit worthiness and genuineness of transactions was in doubt. Hence, since no substantial question of law arises, the appeal is dismissed. 2 ( Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud, J.) ( J.P.Devadhar, J.)

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: since no substantial question of law arises, the appeal is dismissed

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Income Tax Act, 1961 — s. 68.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Income Tax Appeal No. 3050 of 2009). ← Search more judgments