Commissioner Of Income Tax,Vidarbha,Nagpur And 2 Ors v. Mohta Andc. L. Pangarkar J
High Court
07 Aug 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · testcase
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax,Vidarbha,Nagpur And 2 Ors v. Mohta Andc. L. Pangarkar J
Date of order
07 Aug 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax,Vidarbha,Nagpur And 2 Ors v. Mohta Andc. L. Pangarkar J, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYNAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.3386 OF 1997.
Smt.Rashmi Ravikant Harde
.vs.
Commissioner of Income Tax,Vidarbha,Nagpur and 2 ors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Office Notes, Office Memoranda ofCoram, appearances, Court's Orders orCourt's or Judge's Ordersdirections and Registrar's orders.
Mr.Adwait Manohar Adv.for the petitioner.Mr.A.S.Jaiswal, Adv. for the respondents no. 1 and 2.
Coram: ANOOP V. MOHTA andC. L. PANGARKAR J.
Dated: 7[th] AUGUST, 2007.
Thelearnedcounselappearingforrespondents no.1 and 2 has placed on record letterdated 6/8/2008 issuedby the Commissioner ofIncomeTax,NagpurreferringtothepetitionNo.3386/97(Smt.RashmiRavikantHarde..vs..Commissioner of Income Tax) and informed that theCertificate dated 25/6/1999 under VDIS 1997 has–beenissuedtothepetitionerSmt.RashmiRavikant Harde, Nagpur. In view of this, the
petitioner does not want to proceed with thepresentpetition.Thepetitionisaccordinglydisposed of.The letter dated 6/8/2008 marked as'X' for identification is taken on record.
chute
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