In Itxa/532/2002 Of The Commissioner Of Income Stax, Mumbai-Iii v. M/S. Pururava Traders Ltd, the High Court (2005) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In this view of the matter, since thereis no representation on behalf of the respondent,the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.(J.P.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 532 OF 2002.
The Commissioner of Income Tax-3..... Appellant.
V/s.Pururava Traders Ltd.... Respondent.Shri Ashok Kotangale for the appellant.Shri J.D. Mistry i/b Raj Darak for the respondent.CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED : 27.9. 2005.P.C. :----.Learned Counsel appearing for the Revenueavailable in Court, Shri Vyas, Shri Kontagale andShri Rao state that none of them is appearing inthis case. In this view of the matter, since thereis no representation on behalf of the respondent,the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.(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.
EaseValue