Itxa/63/2001 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, City-Xv Mumbai v. Vineet Doshi
High Court
22 Aug 2005 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/63/2001 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, City-Xv Mumbai v. Vineet Doshi
Date of order
22 Aug 2005
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Itxa/63/2001 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, City-Xv Mumbai v. Vineet Doshi, the High Court (2005) decided the matter.
Decision: Considering the joint prayer made, for the reasons recorded in the said order without there being any order of remand, this appeal stands disposed of in terms of the said order with no order as to costs.
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 BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.63 OF 2001
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Mumbai City - XV, Mumbai .. Appellant.
V/s.
Mr.Vineet Doshi .. Respondent.
Mr.Ashok Kotangale i/b. H.D. Rathod for the
appellant.
Mr.A.K. Jasani for the respondent.
CORAM : V.C. DAGA &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 22ND AUGUST, 2005.
DATED : 22ND AUGUST, 2005.
DATED : 22ND AUGUST, 2005.
P.C. :
1. The learned counsel appearing for both the
parties agreed that the appeal be disposed of in
terms of the order of this Court dated February 26,
2002 passed in the case of CIT V/s.Vikram A. Doshi
CIT V/s.Vikram A. Doshireported in [256 ITR 129 (Bombay)]. He further
reported in [256 ITR 129 (Bombay)].
argued that the question raised in the case of Vikram
Doshi leading to remand has not been raised in this
appeal, as such the appeal be disposed of
accordingly.
2. Considering the joint prayer made, for the
reasons recorded in the said order without there
being any order of remand, this appeal stands
disposed of in terms of the said order with no order
as to costs.
(V.C. DAGA, 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.
EaseValue