In Manibhai & Bros v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2001) decided the matter.
Issue: Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO @ MANIBHAI & BROS Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 36 of 1987
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE
and
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO @ MANIBHAI & BROS
Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance:
1. INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 36 of 1987 MR RK PATEL for the Petitioner MR BB NAIK for MR MANISH R BHATT for Respondent No. 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE
and
MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
Date of decision: 27/07/2001
(Per : MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE)
�This reference has been made at the instance of
the applicant assessee. �At the time of hearing of the reference, learned advocate Shri R.K. Patel appearing for the applicant assessee has submitted that he has been instructed by the assessee not to press the reference. In the
�At the time of hearing of the reference, learned advocate Shri R.K. Patel appearing for the applicant assessee has submitted that he has been instructed by the assessee not to press the reference. In the circumstances, we decline to answer the question referred
to this Court.
�The reference stands disposed of accordingly with
no order as to costs.
�����(A.R. Dave, J.)
�����(D.A. Mehta, J.)
(hn)
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.