Mumbai v. R. K. Diamonds
High Court
09 Jul 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Mumbai v. R. K. Diamonds
Date of order
09 Jul 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Mumbai v. R. K. Diamonds, the High Court (2008) allowed the appeal.
Decision: The appeal is, therefore, allowed to be withdrawn and is disposed of as such.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
1
MSS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME-TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 1558 OF 2005
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-20
MUMBAI .. APPELLANT
Vs.
R. K. DIAMONDS .. RESPONDENT
Ms. Poonam P. Bhosale i/b B.M. Chatterjee for
appellant
Mr. Atul K. Jasani for respondent
CORAM:SMT.RANJANA DESAI &
DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,JJ.
DATE: 9/7/2008
P.C.
. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant states that
the tax effect of this appeal is Rs.2,31,981/-.
She states that this appeal is, therefore, covered
by Circular F. No. 279/126/98-ITJ, dated
27/3/2000 and hence she has instructions to
withdraw it. The appeal is, therefore, allowed to
be withdrawn and is disposed of as such.
2
3. Refund of court fees if any as per the rules.
4. We, however, make it clear that law point
involved in this appeal is kept open.
5. In view of the withdrawal of appeal, Notice of
Motion No. 1751 of 2006 does not survive and is
disposed of as such.
JUDGE
JUDGE
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.
EaseValue