Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/696/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Inc...

Itxa/696/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,V,Mumbai v. M/S Om Construction Pvt. Pvt

High Court 05 Jun 2007 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/696/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,V,Mumbai v. M/S Om Construction Pvt. Pvt
Date of order
05 Jun 2007
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In Itxa/696/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,V,Mumbai v. M/S Om Construction Pvt. Pvt, the High Court (2007) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: Heard learned counsel for the applicant.Learned counsel for the applicant seeks leave towithdraw the above appeal as the tax liabilityinvolved in the above is less than Rs.4,00,000/-.The appeal is allowed to be withdrawn and dismissedas such.2.

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 JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.1190 OF 2004ININCOME TAX APPEAL (L) No.382 of 2004ININCOME TAX APPEAL NO.OF 2004The Commissioner of Income Tax.. ApplicantMumbai City V.vsM/s Om Construction Pvt.Ltd ..RespondentMr.R.G.Bhatt for ApplicantMr.P.K.Farida for Respondent.CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &V.C.DAGA, JJDATE : 5th June, 2007P.C.1. In view of withdrawal of the appeal, notice ofmotion has become infructuous.(V.C.Daga, J)(Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J) 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant.Learned counsel for the applicant seeks leave towithdraw the above appeal as the tax liabilityinvolved in the above is less than Rs.4,00,000/-.The appeal is allowed to be withdrawn and dismissedas such.2. Permissible court fees be refunded to theapplicant as per rules.(V.C.Daga, J)(Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan