M/S. Bhanwar Ali Habib Mohd. & Party, Jaipur v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raj-I, Jaipur
High Court
30 Mar 2012 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
M/S. Bhanwar Ali Habib Mohd. & Party, Jaipur v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raj-I, Jaipur
Date of order
30 Mar 2012
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In M/S. Bhanwar Ali Habib Mohd. & Party, Jaipur v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raj-I, Jaipur, the High Court (2012) 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.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHANJAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
D.B. CIVIL MISC. RESTORATION APPLICATION NO. 137/2012IN
D.B. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 293/2005
M/S. BHANWAR ALI HABIB MOHD. & PARTY, JAIPURVS.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAJ-I, JAIPUR.
Date: 30.03.2012
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ARUN MISHRA'HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN-I
Mr. P.K. Kasliwal, for the appellant-applicant.
There is delay of 191 days in filing restorationapplication. For the reasons mentioned in the applicationunder Section 5 of the Limitation Act duly supported byaffidavit, delay of 191 days is condoned.
I.A. No. 560/2012 is disposed of.
Income tax appeal was dismissed for non-compliance of the order of this court dated 28.04.2011. Thecase was dismissed due to mistake of the counsel. Litigantmay not suffer for the mistake of the counsel.
Considering the aforesaid aspect, we are inclinedto restore D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 293/2005 to itsoriginal number, subject to the condition that the appellantshall pay a sum of Rs.500/- as cost and make compliance ofthe order dated 28.04.2011. In case, the appellant depositsRs.500/- as cost with the Rajasthan State Legal Services
Authority and makes compliance of the order dated28.04.2011 within two weeks from today, income tax appeal
shall stand restored to its original number.
The restoration application stands disposed of
accordingly.
(NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN-I),J. (ARUN MISHRA),CJ.
Manoj
“All corrections made in the judgment/order have beenincorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.”
MANOJ NARWANIJUNIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT.
Related & cited cases
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.