In Director Of Income Tax (International Taxation v. Credit Agricole Indosuez, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4271 OF 2009ININCOME TAX APPEAL NO.264 OF 2010
Director of Income Tax (International Taxation)
Versus
Credit Agricole Indosuez
..Appellant.
..Respondent.
Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant.
Mr.Sameer Chitnis i/by Crawford Bayley & Co. for the respondent.
CORAM : Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud & J.P. Devadhar, JJ.
P.C. :
DATE : 17 June, 2010.
1.The Notice of Motion is for restoring the appeal which has been dismissed for non-removal of office objections to file and for extension of time to remove the office objections. Sufficient cause has been shown for restoration. The Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). The Notice of Motion is accordingly disposed of.
2.In the event that the office objections are not removed within six weeks from today, the appeal shall dismissed for want of prosecution without any further reference to the Court.
(J.P. Devadhar, J.)
(Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud, 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