Itxa/481/2002 Of Mr. Mukesh M. Garg v. Income Tax Officer Ward 15(4)
High Court
23 Aug 2004 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/481/2002 Of Mr. Mukesh M. Garg v. Income Tax Officer Ward 15(4)
Date of order
23 Aug 2004
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Itxa/481/2002 Of Mr. Mukesh M. Garg v. Income Tax Officer Ward 15(4), the High Court (2004) decided the matter.
Decision: The appeal is dismissed in limine.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.481 OF 2002
Mr.Mukesh M. Garg .. Appellant.
V/s.
Income-tax Officer, Ward 15(4) .. Respondent.
Mr.Atul Damle with Ms.Jyoti Dialani for the
appellant.
Mr.K.R. Chaudhary i/b. P. Kapoor for the respondent.
CORAM : R.M. LODHA, &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 23RD AUGUST, 2004.
P.C. :
Heard.
2. In the facts and circumstaces of this case
the contention that even while processing the return
under Section 143(1)(a), notice under Section 143(2)
ought to have been given and the discretion under
Section 139(9) ought to have been exercised in favour
of the assessee cannot be accepted.
3. The Tribunal cannot be said to have erred
in observing that the Assessing Officer relied upon
the documents accompanying the return filed by the
2
assessee and the expenses as per revenue account were
allowed. The said revenue account was furnished by
the assessee and since the Assessing Officer placed
reliance thereon, no notice was required to be given
to the assessee.
4. No substantial question of law arises in
this appeal. The appeal is dismissed in limine.
(R.M. LODHA, J.)
(R.M. LODHA, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, 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.