Core Healthcare Ltd. - Petitioner(S v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Ahmedabad-I & 1 - Respondent(S
High Court
27 Aug 2012 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Core Healthcare Ltd. - Petitioner(S v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Ahmedabad-I & 1 - Respondent(S
Date of order
27 Aug 2012
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Core Healthcare Ltd. - Petitioner(S v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Ahmedabad-I & 1 - Respondent(S, the High Court (2012) decided the matter.
Issue: 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge? ========================================= CORE HEALTHCARE LTD. - Petitioner(s)VersusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AHMEDABAD-I & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================= Appearance: MR SN SOPARKAR, SR.
Decision: In that view of the matter, the petition is disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABADSPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No.1196 of 2004
For Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHIHONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI
=========================================
1[Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see ]the judgment?the judgment?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3[Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the ]judgment?judgment?
Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as 4to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder?any order made thereunder?
5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge?
=========================================
CORE HEALTHCARE LTD. - Petitioner(s)VersusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AHMEDABAD-I & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance:
MR SN SOPARKAR, SR. COUNSEL with MRS SWATI SOPARKARfor Petitioner(s): 1,MR MR BHATT, SR. COUNSEL with MRS MAUNA M BHATT for Respondent(s): 1 - 2.=========================================
CORAM :HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI
Date : 27/08/2012
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
1.This petition was filed by the petitioner company at a stage where the company was before BIFR pending formation of a scheme. At that stage, the prayer made was for a direction to the respondents not to enforce a notice under section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for recovery of the outstanding dues of the company.
2.Learned counsel Shri S.N. Soparkar for the petitioner stated, on instructions, that since filing of the petition, the company has no longer remained before the BIFR. In view of the above statement, the main factual basis on which the prayer for staying the demand notice was made, no longer survives. In that view of the matter, the petition is disposed of. Rule discharged. Interim relief, if any, is vacated. No costs.
( Akil Kureshi, J. )
( Harsha Devani, J. )
hki
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.