Income Tax Appeal v. The Deputy Commissioner Of
High Court
16 Sep 2008 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Income Tax Appeal v. The Deputy Commissioner Of
Date of order
16 Sep 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Income Tax Appeal v. The Deputy Commissioner Of, the High Court (2008) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: However, if the order of recallpassed in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal is set aside on any ground, theappellant will be at liberty to file an appealto challenge the basic order.
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 BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.506 OF 2007
ABG Heavy Industries Ltd.AppellantversusThe Deputy Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Central Circle,Mumbai.Respondent
Ms.Aarti Visanji with Mr.Mance Kulkarni i/byAmarchand Mangaldas & S.A.Shroff & Co. forappellant.
Mr.Suresh Kumar for respondent.
PC :
CORAM : BILAL NAZKI ANDA.A.KUMBHAKONI, JJ.DATE : 16th September 2008
1. The appellant submits that the impugnedorder was recalled by the Tribunal on anapplication made by the assessee. But theorder of recall by the Tribunal has now beenchallenged by the Department by writ petition,which is pending. Therefore, the appellantseeks to withdraw present appeal with libertyto file an appeal, if the order of recall isset aside.
2. As such, this appeal is allowed to bewithdrawn. However, if the order of recallpassed in favour of the assessee by the
Tribunal is set aside on any ground, theappellant will be at liberty to file an appealto challenge the basic order.
(BILAL NAZKI, J.)
(A.A.KUMBHAKONI, 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