In a direct income tax appeal challenging an ITAT order regarding the computation of house property income, the High Court held that the question did not raise any substantial question of law following a previous order and dismissed the appeal.
Appeal dismissed. No order as to costs.
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.
909-itxa-1836-2014.doc
rrpillai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1836 OF 2014
Commissioner of Income Tax-2 ..Appellant
Versus
M/s. Photogravurs (India) Pvt.Ltd. ..Respondent
Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Appellant.
Mr. Jitendra Singh for the Respondent.
CORAM: M. S. SANKLECHA & A. K. MENON, JJ. DATE : 23rd MARCH, 2017
P. C.
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal has erred in directing the Assessing Officer to compute the income from house property of the assessee company
1/2
909-itxa-1836-2014.doc
on the basis of municipal ratable value, without appreciating the fact that the A.O. has brought on record that the prevailing market value in the area was much higher ?
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal erred in directing the Assessing Officer to compute income from house property on the basis of municipal ratable value without appreciating the higher prevailing market value.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
CIT-2 vs. Photogravurs (India) Pvt. Ltd.Referred¶19
CIT-2 vs. Photogravurs (India) Pvt. Ltd. being ITXA/1472/2012
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Commissioner of Income Tax-2
M/s. Photogravurs (India) Pvt.Ltd.
M. S. Sanklecha
A. K. Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
