Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Muzaffarpur v. M/S. Rishi Builders India Pvt. Ltd., Sri Krishna Nagar, Motihari
High Court
02 Mar 2016 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · patnahcucisdb94
Parties
Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Muzaffarpur v. M/S. Rishi Builders India Pvt. Ltd., Sri Krishna Nagar, Motihari
Date of order
02 Mar 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Muzaffarpur v. M/S. Rishi Builders India Pvt. Ltd., Sri Krishna Nagar, Motihari, the High Court (2016) 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.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNAMiscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.532 of 2016
In
MA 694 of 2010
======================================================
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Muzaffarpur
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
M/s. Rishi Builders India Pvt. Ltd., Sri Krishna Nagar, Motihari
.... .... Opp. Party
====================================================== Appearance :For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha, Sr. S.C. with Ms. Archana Prasad, A. S.C.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA)
2 02-03-2016
Upon hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and
considering the explanation given in the restoration application, M.A. No. 694 of 2010 is directed to be restored to its original file.
The restoration application is, accordingly, allowed.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that subsequently the notice in the correct form has also been filed though after the peremptory time granted by this Court.
Office is directed to accept the said notices and issue the
same.
(Ramesh Kumar Datta, J)
spal/-
(Sudhir Singh, J)
U
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