In Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Pragati Enterprises, the High Court (2012) 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 AT PATNAMiscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.921 of 2009
======================================================
Commissioner Of Income Tax
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
M/S Pragati Enterprises
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Archana Sinha For the Respondent/s : Mr.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAINORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH)
2 06-07-2012
It appears that at pre notice stage M.A. No. 35/2006 was dismissed due to non compliance of a peremptory order directing for removal of certain defects.
Considering the explanation furnished in this application, the prayer for restoration is allowed and M.A. No. 35/2006 is restored to its original file on the condition that defects No. 1 to 4 of M.A. No. 35/06 shall be removed within two weeks from today.
(Shiva Kirti Singh, J)
BKS/-
(Vikash Jain, 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.
EaseValue