The High Court of Bombay dismissed Income Tax Appeals 1119 and 1120 of 2000. The court held that the Tribunal's interpretation of an agreement did not raise substantial questions of law, leaving the matter to appreciation of evidence.
None. The appeals were dismissed as they involved only appreciation of evidence.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1119 OF 2000 AND
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1120 OF 2000
The Commissioner of Income Tax
..Appellants
Vs.
Kamat Hotels (I) Ltd.
..Respondents
Mr.Ashok Kotangale for the Appellants. Mr.P.J.Pardiwalla i/b.Vilas Joshi & Co. for the Respondents.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
V.C.DAGA, JJ.
DATE : 4TH JUNE, 2007
| P.C. | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | Heard | the | learned Counsel | for the | parties. | |||
| The | Tribunal | has | clearly | inter | preted | the | agreeme | nt to |
| be | a conducting |
agreement. | T | he | above | Appeals | involve | |
| only | appreciation | o | f evidence |
and | do | not | raise | any |
substantial questions of law. Hence, the Appeals
stand dismissed.
(V.C.DAGA,J.)
(DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal's interpretation of the agreement to be a 'conducting agreement' raised any substantial question of law.
Whether the Income Tax Appeal Nos. 1119 and 1120 of 2000 should be allowed or dismissed on facts and evidence.
Commissioner of Income Tax
Kamat Hotels (I) Ltd.
S. Radhakrishnan
V. C. Daga
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
