Case LawHigh Court › Itl/71/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Incom...

Itl/71/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iv v. Himmatlal B. Agrawal

High Court 02 Jul 2007 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · testcase
Parties
Itl/71/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iv v. Himmatlal B. Agrawal
Date of order
02 Jul 2007
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In Itl/71/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iv v. Himmatlal B. Agrawal, the High Court (2007) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: Appeals are accordingly allowed to be withdrawn.

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 BOMBAYNAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.INCOME TAX APPEAL NOS. 71 OF 2006; AND 103 OF 2006 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coramappearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Ordersand Registrar's orders. Shri Anand Parchure, Advocate for the appellant. CORAM: J.P. DEVADHAR & B.P. DHARMADHIKAR, JJ. 02ND JULY, 2007 Shri Anand Parchure, the learned Counsel for the appellant states that the tax effect involved in these appeals is Rs.2,80,000/- and nil respectively. In view of the Board Circular dated 5[th] June, 2007 issued in the light of the judgment of this Court in the case of CIT, Mumbai .v. M/s. Vitessee Trading Ltd. (ITA(L) 118/2003 decided on 23rd April, 2007), the learned Counsel for the appellants seeks liberty to withdraw these appeals. Appeals are accordingly allowed to be withdrawn. Refund of Court fees as per law. CA Nos.4192/2007 and 4193/2007 in ITA No.71/2006 and CA Nos.3981/2007 and 3982/2007 in ITA No.103/2006 are also stand disposed of in view of the disposal of the aforesaid appeals. JUDGE JUDGE
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan