2008 (3) TMI 223

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appellant. N. Muralikumaran for the respondent. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by K. RAVIRAJA PANDIAN J.—The two appeals are filed by the assessee relating to the assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04. 2. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of manufacture and export of hosiery garments. 3. The issue involved in these two appeals are whet....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Products P. Ltd. v. CIT reported in [1998] 229 ITR 123. It has also been further submitted that the Bombay High Court also has taken the same view in the case of CIT v. Nima Specific Family Trust reported in [2001] 248 ITR 29. The judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has been taken to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court in Joint CIT v. Mandideep Engineering and Packaging Industries P. Ltd....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t on January 12, 2001, (see [2001] 247 ITR (St.) 36). This view has been followed repeatedly by different High Courts in a number of cases against which no special leave petitions were filed meaning thereby that the Department has accepted the view taken in these judgment. See CIT v. Nima Specific Family Trust reported in [2001] 248 ITR 29 (Bom) ; CIT v. Chokshi Contacts P. Ltd. [2001] 251 ITR 587....