Case LawHigh Court › City-15, Mumbai v. Chhotalal P. Patel (H...

City-15, Mumbai v. Chhotalal P. Patel (Huf

High Court 03 Dec 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
City-15, Mumbai v. Chhotalal P. Patel (Huf
Date of order
03 Dec 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In City-15, Mumbai v. Chhotalal P. Patel (Huf, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal.

Decision: Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY VPH ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 1210 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income-Tax, ... Appellant City-15, Mumbai Vs Chhotalal P. Patel (HUF) ... Respondent Mr. K. R. Choudhary, for the appellant. CORAM: Dr. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, & V. C. DAGA, JJ. DATED: DECEMBER 3, 2008. P.C.: ---- . Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. The learned counsel for the appellant has tendered the affidavit dated 3rd December, 2008 wherein the appellant has pointed out that the appellant and its advocate had unfortunately not properly stated before this Court, and that the appellant was already served and the affidavit of service was also filed. In view of the same, by our earlier order dated 19th November 2008 wherein the appellant was directed to pay costs of Rs.5,000/-, stands withdrawn. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. - 2 - As the value of tax assessment is less than Rs. four lakhs, the learned counsel for the appellant seeks leave to withdraw the appeal. Leave is granted. Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Permissible court-fee refund be given to the appellant. Sd/- Sd/- [ V.C. DAGA, J.] [ Dr. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
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