Case Law › High Court › Commisioner Of Income Tax, Central, Jaip...

Commisioner Of Income Tax, Central, Jaipur v. Sh. Rakesh Kumar Damba

High Court 23 Jan 2015 In favour of: Revenue

Forum / Bench

High Court · rhcjodh240618

Parties

Date of order

23 Jan 2015

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Commisioner Of Income Tax, Central, Jaipur v. Sh. Rakesh Kumar Damba, the High Court (2015) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHANAT JODHPUR O R D E R D.B. CIVIL MISC. RESTORATION APPLICATION NO.220/2014IN D.B. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.168/2013 Commisioner of Income Tax, Central, JaipurVersusSh. Rakesh Kumar Damba Date of Order :: 23.01.2015 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHURHON'BLE MISS JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR Mr. K.K. Bissa for the applicant BY THE COURT : An application is preferred to recall the order dated16.09.2014 and to restore D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.168/2013 atits original number. It is stated that counsel for the appellant failedto appear before the court when the case was called being busy insome other court. The application is supported by an affidavitsworn in by learned counsel for the appellant. Having considered the facts averred in the application, we deem it appropriate to accept this application. Accordingly, thesame is allowed. The order dated 16.09.2014 is recalled. D.B.Income Tax Appeal No.168/2013 is restored at its original number. , J. , 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.