Case LawHigh Court › Manish v. The Additional Commissionerof...

Manish v. The Additional Commissionerof Income Tax, Range-2,Aurangabad 431 003,Maharashtra

High Court 11 Sep 2018 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hcaurdb
Parties
Manish v. The Additional Commissionerof Income Tax, Range-2,Aurangabad 431 003,Maharashtra
Date of order
11 Sep 2018
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Manish v. The Additional Commissionerof Income Tax, Range-2,Aurangabad 431 003,Maharashtra, the High Court (2018) decided the matter.

Decision: Alok Sharma, learned Counsel for the respondent, we allow the application in terms of prayer clause (A) and permit the applicant to place on record the copy of order in ITAT dated 4th September, 2017.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5679 OF 2018 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.58 OF 2018 Manish s/o Dharsibhai Parmer,Age: 53 years, Occ: Business,R/o. Vishnavi, N-3, CIDCO,Aurangabad, Maharashtra...APPLICANT VERSUS The Additional Commissionerof Income Tax, Range-2,Aurangabad 431 003,Maharashtra. ..RESPONDENT Mr R.M. Sharma, Advocate for applicant/appellant;Mr Alok Sharma, Advocate for respondent CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & RAVINDRA V. GHUGE,JJ. DATE : 11[th] SEPTEMBER, 2018 ORAL ORDER : Heard Mr. R.M. Sharma, learned Counsel appearing for the applicant/appellant and Mr. Alok Sharma, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent. By way of present application, the 5679.18ca applicant/appellant prays for permission to place on record the document in the nature of an order passed by ITAGT, Pune dated 4th September, 2017. 3.In opposition, the application, Mr. Alok Sharma, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that an attempt of the applicant/appellant is to rely on completion certificate obtained the applicant/appellant subsequent to the assessment year. 4.Without prejudice to the contentions raised by Mr. Alok Sharma, learned Counsel for the respondent, we allow the application in terms of prayer clause (A) and permit the applicant to place on record the copy of order in ITAT dated 4th September, 2017. The application is accordingly disposed of. (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE) JUDGE (PRASANNA B. VARALE) JUDGE
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