Motors Ltd Ltdpetitionerthroughmr. Ajay Vohra And Ms. Kavitajha, Advocates v. Addl Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
21 Nov 2013 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Motors Ltd Ltdpetitionerthroughmr. Ajay Vohra And Ms. Kavitajha, Advocates v. Addl Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
21 Nov 2013
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Motors Ltd Ltdpetitionerthroughmr. Ajay Vohra And Ms. Kavitajha, Advocates v. Addl Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
I
y
$-21 &22 &22
+W.P.(C) 8684/2010
HERO HONDA MOTORS LTD
MOTORS LTD LTDPetitionerThroughMr. Ajay Vohra and Ms. KavitaJha, Advocates.
versus
ADDL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
TAXRespondentThroughMr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr.Standing Counsel.
+
W.P.(C) 49/2012
HERO MOTOCORP LTD AND ANRPetitionerThroughMr. Ajay Vohra and Ms. KavitaJha, Advocates.
versus
ADDITIONALCOMMISSIONEROF INCOME-TAXANDANRRespondentThroughMr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr.Standing Counsel.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANHV KHANNAHON'BLEMR. JUSTICESANJEEVSACHDEVA
ORDER21.11.2013
%
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that they havesubstantially succeeded in appellate proceedings, though appealfor one year is still pending.In these circumstances,he statesthat he will like to withdraw the present writ petition withoutprejudice to their contention that special audit was not justified
X
\\ii/
in the facts of the case.It is also stated that special audit hasbeendirectedin subsequentyearsand tiie writpetitionispending before the Court and withdrawal of the present writpetition should not adversely affect the said writ petition.Taking the statement on record, the writ petition isdismissedas withdrawnwithoutexpressingany opiniononmerits.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
^^'(ixaJ,•SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.
NOVEMBER 21, 2013NA
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.