In Mehta Parikh & Co. Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2000) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- MEHTA PARIKH & CO.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 262 of 1985
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MR DM DHARMADHIKARI
and
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH
============================================================ 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
-------------------------------------------------------------- MEHTA PARIKH & CO. PVT. LTD.
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
-------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR RK PATEL for Petitioner
MR BB NAIK for Respondent No. 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : CHIEF JUSTICE MR DM DHARMADHIKARI
and
MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH
Date of decision: 06/11/2000
ORAL JUDGEMENT
(Per : CHIEF JUSTICE MR DM DHARMADHIKARI)
�Mr RK Patel, learned counsel appearing for the
assessee states that the assessee has instructed him not to prosecute the reference as the assessee is not interested in the answer of the question of which he has sought the reference. �In view of the stand taken on behalf of the assessee, we do not consider it necessary to answer the question. �The reference is accordingly disposed of on the statement made on behalf of the assessee. ����(D.M. Dharmadhikari, CJ) ����(M.S. Shah, J.)
sundar/-
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.