In Itxa/1614/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -2 v. Meditab Specialities Pvt Ltd, the High Court (2016) decided the matter.
Decision: In any case we dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution.
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
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1614 OF 2011
Commissioner of Income Tax-2
VersusM/s. Meditab Specialities Pvt. Ltd.
..Appellant
..Respondent
...........
None for the appellant.Mr. Netaji Gawde i/b. Sanjay Udeshi for the respondent.
...........
CORAM: M. S. SANKLECHA &
A. K. MENON, JJ.
DATE : 10[th] AUGUST, 2016
P.C.:
1.This Appeal relates to Assessment Year 2005-06.
2.None appears in support of the appeal on behalf of the Revenue. It appears that the Revenue is not interested in prosecuting this appeal. We note that the tax effect involved in the present appeal is Rs.9.44 lakhs as indicated in para 10 of the appeal memo. This possibly explains the reason why none appears on behalf of the Revenue. In any case we dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution.
(A. K. MENON, J.)
(M. S. SANKLECHA, 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