✦ Bombay High Court

JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.516 OF The Commissioner of Income Tax, City-22 v. M/s. Jagdish C. Manek

Income Tax Appeal No. 516 of 2008R S MOHITE, F I REBELLO

Judgment

Mr.A.S.Shivsharan Mr.Arun Sathe ..Appellant. ..Respondent. Appellant. Respondent. CORAM DATED : F.I. : REBELLO 16TH & R.S. MOHITE, JANUARY, JJ. 2009. : Admit following question law. PC

i) Whether circumstances Hon’ble ITAT justified deleting addition account premium CR Sheets Rs.51,28,344/- without appreciating additions statement Shri.J.P.Doshi during search proceedings evidences during course search? ii) Whether circumstances Hob’ble ITAT justified deleting additions assessing officer account purchase Rs.49,76,131/- M/s. unaccounted Micron :2: Steel Rs.5,76,930/- premium account unaccounted purchases without appreciating purchases reflected regular account assessee?

Respondent waives service. ( R.S. MOHITE, J.)

( F.I.REBELLO, J.)

Find similar cases Start drafting free

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.

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. 516 of 2008). ← Search more judgments

Judgment

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

Related cases why they’re linked — not procedural history

Continue researching