Itr/341/2009 Of M/S Indofil Chemicals Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bombay City Vi
High Court
10 Sep 2009 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itr/341/2009 Of M/S Indofil Chemicals Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bombay City Vi
Date of order
10 Sep 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Itr/341/2009 Of M/S Indofil Chemicals Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bombay City Vi, the High Court (2009) decided the matter.
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 JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX REFERENCE (LDG.) NOS.
None for the applicant
None for the respondent.
P.C.:
All these matters were called out since the matters were pending in this Court right from the year 1981. Almost more than 29 years have passed. No steps
have been taken by the assessees at whose instance the statements of case in their respective cases have been forwarded by the Tribunal.
2.This Court had issued notices to the parties to the references. They were called upon to take steps approaching the office of the Prothonotary and Senior Master of this Court and to take steps as required under section 657 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980 (“Rules for short) so as to place the references on board for final disposal since the provision of rule 657 required the person at whose instance reference has been made to take necessary steps to supply paper book. In the event of noncompliance of rule 659, the matters were required to be placed on Board for orders. Order was required to be passed in exercise of powers under rule 660 of the Rules. That is how all these matters are placed on board for orders.
3.Since no steps have been taken by the assessees in either of the matters as required under rules 657 and 658 of the Rules, we have no option but to return all these references unanswered in exercise of powers under rule 659 of the Rules.
4.In the result, all these references are returned unanswered and disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
(V.C.DAGA 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.