Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/841/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,City10, Mumnbai v. United Diagnocstic International Ltd
Date of order
09 Aug 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
In Itxa/841/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,City10, Mumnbai v. United Diagnocstic International Ltd, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue states that inspite of his best efforts, he has not received anyinstructions from the Revenue whether to prosecute this appeal orwithdraw this appeal bearing in mind that the tax effect involved in theappeal is less than Rs.50 lakhs.
Decision: Digitallysigned byUdayUday ShivajiJagtapShivajiDate:2018.08.13Jagtap10:53:40+0530 3.In the above view, the present appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
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. 841 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income TaxCity-10, Mumbai
.. Appellant
v/s.
United Diagnostic International Ltd.
..Respondent
Mr. Suresh Kumar for the appellant None for the respondent
CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA & SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.J.
P.C.
DATED : 9[th] AUGUST, 2018.
1.On 25[th] July, 2018, this appeal was kept on yesterday's board
under the caption “for withdrawal”. However, Mr. Suresh Kumar,sought time and at his request the appeal was kept today.
2.Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue
states that inspite of his best efforts, he has not received anyinstructions from the Revenue whether to prosecute this appeal orwithdraw this appeal bearing in mind that the tax effect involved in theappeal is less than Rs.50 lakhs.
Digitallysigned byUdayUday ShivajiJagtapShivajiDate:2018.08.13Jagtap10:53:40+0530
3.In the above view, the present appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
(SANDEEP K. SHINDE 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