Case LawHigh Court › By Sri Y v. Raviraj, Advocate

By Sri Y v. Raviraj, Advocate

High Court 02 Nov 2016 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · karhcdharwad
Parties
By Sri Y v. Raviraj, Advocate
Date of order
02 Nov 2016
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In By Sri Y v. Raviraj, Advocate, the High Court (2016) dismissed the appeal.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKADHARWAD BENCH DATLBD THIS THE DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2016 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK B.HINCHIGERI AN [I THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR LT.A. No.669/2015 BETWEEN: 1.THER COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA C.R.BUILDING, ATTAVARA,MANGALORE-575 OO1.MANGALORE-575 OO1. 2.THER INCOME TAX OFFICEWARD-2,SANTERI KRUPA BUILDING,KAIGA ROAD, HABBUWADA,KARWAR-581 306WARD-2,SANTERI KRUPA BUILDING,KAIGA ROAD, HABBUWADA,KARWAR-581 306 (BY SRI Y. V. RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE) .. APPELLANTS AND: SRI RAJENDRA NAGESH BHATRAJLAXMI JEWELLERS,SADASHIVGAD,KARWAR — 5813452PAN : ABLPB 4145M. . RESPONDENT THIS APPEBKAL IS FILED UNDER SKCTION 260A OF TINCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI, INITA NO.122/PNJ/2015 DATED 24.08.2015 AND CONFIRM THE ORDEROF THR APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDERPASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, KARWAR. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,P.S.DINESH KUMAR Jf,DEBLIVEBERED THE RFOLLOWI JUDGMENT sri Y.V. Raviraj, learned counsel for the appellants fairlysubmitsthatin|VIEWotCircularNo.21/2015.4F.No.279/Misc.142/2007-IT] (Pt), dated 10.12.2015, this appeal isnot maintainable. 2. The said submission is placed on record. The appeal tsdismissed as not maintainable, Sd/-JUDGE Sd/-JUDGE ;4?
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan