Commissioner Of Income Tax,Vidarbha,Nagpur And Ors v. Mohta And
High Court
07 Aug 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · testcase
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax,Vidarbha,Nagpur And Ors v. Mohta And
Date of order
07 Aug 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax,Vidarbha,Nagpur And Ors v. Mohta And, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Having known that those issues are confirmed andattained the finality by the appellate authorityunder the Income Tax Act, there is no question topermit to raise the same challenge in this petition.In view of this, the petition is dismissed. chute JUDGE.JUDGE.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYNAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.3496 OF 1998.
Dhanraj Harichand Khandelwal
.vs.
Commissioner of Income Tax,Vidarbha,Nagpur and ors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda ofCoram, appearances, Court's Orders ordirections and Registrar's orders.
Court's or Judge's Orders
Mr.A.S.Jaiswal, Adv. for the respondents no. 1 and 2.
Coram: ANOOP V. MOHTA and
C. L. PANGARKAR J.
Dated: 7[th] AUGUST, 2007.
None for the petitioner again.
The petitioner has challenged basicallythe assessment orders dated 3/1/1995 for theassessment year 1992-93 and 1993-94 to the extentof levy of interest under Section 234-A and 234-B ofthe Income Tax Act.The petitioner appealedagainst those assessment orders which have alsoattained the finality apart from fact on a basicfoundation that theprovisionsaremandatory.
Having known that those issues are confirmed andattained the finality by the appellate authorityunder the Income Tax Act, there is no question topermit to raise the same challenge in this petition.In view of this, the petition is dismissed.
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