The Commissioner of Income-tax-16 v. Rasila Navin Gada
[Citation -2015-LL-0309-24]
| Citation | 2015-LL-0309-24 |
|---|---|
| Appellant Name | The Commissioner of Income-tax-16 |
| Respondent Name | Rasila Navin Gada |
| Court | HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY |
| Relevant Act | Income-tax |
| Date of Order | 09/03/2015 |
| Assessment Year | 2006-07 |
| Judgment | View Judgment |
| Keyword Tags | substantial question of law • unexplained cash credit • share trading |
| Bot Summary: | The appellant revenue has formulated following questions of law for our consideration: Whether on the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the appellate order bearing no. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified on relying the decision of Mr. Mukesh Ratilal Marolia decided by the Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay despite the fact the said decision had not been accepted by the department and SLP had been recommended to the CBDT 3. The impugned order of the Tribunal dated 8 August 2012 is a common order which also disposed of an appeal relating to Mrs. Kasturba H. Gada for the Assessment Year 2006 07. The revenue had preferred an appeal against the impugned order in case of Kasturba H. Gada being Income Tax Appeal No. 299/2013 and this Court by its order dated 21 January 2015 found that no substantial question of law arises and refused to entertain the appeal. Mr. Malhotra, the learned Counsel appearing for revenue fairly states that the question as proposed by the revenue stands concluded against the revenue so far as this Court is concerned by the order of this Court in the case of Kasturba H. Gada rendered on 21 January 2015. Mr. Malhotra clarifies that he is not aware whether the revenue has accepted the decision of this Court in the case of Kasturba H. S.S.DESHPANDE 2 / 3 ::: Uploaded on - 10/03/2015 ::: Downloaded on - 07/04/2020 14:54:51 ::: 31.ITXA.699. Accordingly no substantial question of law arises for our consideration. |