TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (5) TMI 9
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....R SUDHIR M MEHTA, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT : MR MAHESH B BARIYA, ADVOCATE ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) [1.0] As common question of law and facts arise in these group of Tax Appeals, all these Tax Appeals are decided and disposed of by this common judgment and order. [2.0] In all these Tax Appeals the following common substantial question of law arises; ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") up to Rs. 5 lacs and further benefit under Section 89 of the Act. By the impugned judgment and order and after following the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nagesh Devidas Kulkarni reported in 291 ITR 407 and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Karamchari Union Vs. Union of India reported in [2001] 243 ITR 143 (S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to benefits under Section 89 of the Act. The aforesaid decision has been approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the subsequent decision in the case of Chandra Ranganathan and Ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2010] 326 ITR 49 (SC). Not only that even subsequently considering the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Koodathil Kallyatan Ambujakshan (Supra) it was held t....