The Bombay High Court dismissed an income tax appeal where the appellant admitted that the substantial questions of law were squarely covered by a prior judgment of this court, invoking the principle of law of the case. Consequently, the appeal did not survive.
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.
916-ITXA-1978-2017.doc
1 / 1
Digitally signed by PURTI PURTI PRASAD PRASAD PARAB PARAB Date: 2021.11.18 10:48:43 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1978 OF 2017
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central) - 4
….Appellant
V/s.
M/s. Bermaco Energy Systems Ltd.…Respondent
----
Mr. Tejvee Singh for Appellant.
None for Respondent.
----
CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM &
AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATED : 17th NOVEMBER 2021
P.C. :
1.Mr. Singh in fairness and as an officer of the court states that
the substantial questions proposed in this appeal are squarely covered by
the judgment of this court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Continental
Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.1 and therefore the appeal will
not survive.
2.Appeal accordingly dismissed.
(AMIT B. BORKAR, J.)(K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)
1
(2015) 374 ITR 645 (BOM)
Purti Parab
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.Applied¶15
(2015) 374 ITR 645 (BOM)
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - 4
M/s. Bermaco Energy Systems Ltd.
Amit B. Borkar
K.R. Shriram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court