Case Law › High Court › Mumbai v. Mr.p.n.vast Cheno

Mumbai v. Mr.p.n.vast Cheno

High Court 23 Oct 2007 In favour of: Unclear

Forum / Bench

High Court · newos

Parties

Date of order

23 Oct 2007

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Mumbai v. Mr.p.n.vast Cheno, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.

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

(-1-) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1562 of 2006 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.776 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income-tax Mumbai ..Appellant Vs. Mr.P.N.Vast Cheno.................Respondent Mr.S.M.Shah with Mr. P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant Mr. Aditya Chitale for the Respondent. CORAM: F.I. J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. DATED: 23rd October, 2007 P.C.: . Considering that the tax incidence is less than Rs.4.00 lakhs learned Counsel for the Appellant seeks to withdraw the Motion along with Appeal. Hence Motion along with Appeal dismissed as withdrawn. Refund of Court Fees as per rules. Certified copy expedited. (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, J.)

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.