Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/91/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Inco...

Itxa/91/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 4, Mumbai v. M/S Shree Rajasthan Texchem Ltd., Mumbai

High Court 23 Jul 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/91/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 4, Mumbai v. M/S Shree Rajasthan Texchem Ltd., Mumbai
Date of order
23 Jul 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/91/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 4, Mumbai v. M/S Shree Rajasthan Texchem Ltd., Mumbai, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: P.C. :- 1.The above appeal which was placed for admission today, was in fact placed for admission on an earlier occasion when conditional order was passed to the effect that all office objections should be removed within the time stipulated therein, failing which the appeal shall stand dismissed wit...

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 JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 105 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax V/s.M/s. Shree Rajasthan Texchem Ltd.Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for appellant. ..Appellant. ..Respondent. Mr. Ashok Kotangale i/b. A.D. Nagarjun for respondent. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 23RD JULY, 2009. P.C. :- 1.The above appeal which was placed for admission today, was in fact placed for admission on an earlier occasion when conditional order was passed to the effect that all office objections should be removed within the time stipulated therein, failing which the appeal shall stand dismissed without reference to the Court. 2.Admittedly, the office objections have not been removed in the above appeal within the stipulated time though the appeal is pending in this Court for sufficiently long time. It is pertinent to note that wherever extension of time for removal of office objections were sought within the period specified, this Court has granted extension of time. However, in the above matter, neither the objections are removed within the stipulated time nor extension of time is sought for removing the office objections. As a result, the conditional order has become operational and the above appeal stood dismissed for want of removal of office objections after the expiry of the stipulated time. In this view of the matter, no further order is necessary. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA, 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