Bhagyanagar, Nanded v. The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Aurangabad
High Court
15 Feb 2012 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · hcaurdb
Parties
Bhagyanagar, Nanded v. The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Aurangabad
Date of order
15 Feb 2012
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Bhagyanagar, Nanded v. The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Aurangabad, the High Court (2012) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: 70/2007 and 73/2007, present Appeal is also dismissed summarily.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
(1) Tax Appeal No. 72 of 2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.
Tax Appeal No. 72 of 2007
Shri Vijay Narayandas Rizwani,
37, Bhagyanagar, Nanded.
.. Appellant (Original assessee)
versus
1. The Commissioner of Income-tax,Aurangabad.
2. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax,Cir. 3(2), Nanded.3. Income-tax Officer,Ward 3(6), Nanded.
.. Respondents (Original respondents)
.......................
Mr. M.K. Kulkarni, Advocate, with Mr. R.R. Chandak, Advocate, for theappellant.
Mr. Alok Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General,for respondent nos.1 to 3.
(2) Tax Appeal No. 72 of 2007
CORAM : D.G. KARNIK & S.B. DESHMUKH, JJ.
DATE : 15TH FEBRUARY 2012
COURT'S ORDER :
1.Learned Counsel for the appellant states that the facts in this appeal are identical with the facts in Tax Appeal Nos. 70/2007 and 73/2007, except that the present Appeal relates to the different assessment year and different amount of commission.
2.Hence, for the reasons recorded in the speaking order passed today in Tax Appeal No. 70/2007 and 73/2007, present Appeal is also dismissed summarily.
( S.B. DESHMUKH ) ( D.G. KARNIK )
JUDGE JUDGE
.........................
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.
EaseValue