9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 563X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... seeb, Adv. Mrs Anil Katiyar,Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Uday U Lalit, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gagan Sanghi, Adv. Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal,Adv. ORDER 1. Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted. 3. These appeals are directed against the order passed by the High Court of Bombay in Income Tax Appeal Nos. 49 and 152 of 2010 dated 12.10.2011. 4. By the impugned order(s) the High Court has dismissed the appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of law for consideration and decision by the High Court. The questions of law that were raised by the Revenue are as under: "(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in law in holding that there were no contracts between the assessee and the truck owners to whom the freight payments were made to be hit by the provision of section 194C of the Act? (2) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvassed before it, by a cryptic and non- speaking order had dismissed the Income Tax Appeals. Aggrieved by the order passed by the High Court the revenue is before us in these civil appeals. 7. This Court has time and again said that High Court while disposing of an appeal should first raise substantial question of law for consideration and decision and thereafter decide the same by a speaking or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
