Asian Paints Ltd.mumbai v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
08 Apr 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Asian Paints Ltd.mumbai v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
08 Apr 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Asian Paints Ltd.mumbai v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.
Decision: In view of the aforesaid statement made by the ( 2 ) learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1 the Writ Petition stands disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
( 1 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.479 OF 2008
WRIT PETITION NO.479 OF 2008
Asian Paints Ltd.Mumbai .. Petitioner
Vs.
The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Central Circle 32, Mumbai & Anr. .. Respondents
Mr.S.E.Dastoor with Mr.Murlidhar & Mr.Atul Jasani for
the Petitioners.
Mr.Benni Chatterjee with Mrs.Poonam Bhosale and
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for Respondents
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATE : 8th April, 2008
DATE : 8th April, 2008
P.C.
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. By
this Petition, the Petitioners are challenging an order
dated 28th January, 2008 whereby the Respondents had
rejected the objections raised by the Petitioners
without giving any reasons. The learned Counsel for
Respondent No.1, on instructions from Mr.G.U.Ingole
(Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-32,
Mumbai) who is personally present before the Court,
states that the Respondent No.1 will forthwith withdraw
the impugned order dated 28th Junary, 2008, and after
giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the
Petitioners the Respondent No.1 will pass a detailed
order giving reasons therein dealing with the objections
raised by the Petitioners, as expeditiously as possible,
preferrably by 15th May, 2008.
2. In view of the aforesaid statement made by the
( 2 )
learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1 the Writ
Petition stands disposed of.
3. We make it clear that in the event the order of the
Respondent No.1 were to be adverse to the Petitioners,
the same shall not be given effect to for a period of
four weeks from the date of that order.
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.