Case LawHigh Court › Natverlal Bhikhabhai & Co. Pvt Ltd v. Co...

Natverlal Bhikhabhai & Co. Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 08 Feb 2000 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Natverlal Bhikhabhai & Co. Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
08 Feb 2000
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Natverlal Bhikhabhai & Co. Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2000) decided the matter.

Issue: Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- NATVERLAL BHIKHABHAI & CO.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 394 of 1984 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE J.N.BHATT and MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH ============================================================ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------- NATVERLAL BHIKHABHAI & CO. PVT LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR JP SHAH for Petitioner MR BB NAIK WITH MR MANISH R BHATT for Respondent No. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE J.N.BHATT and MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH Date of decision: 08/02/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT When the matter was called out, we, whuke keeping in mind the smallness of the amount involved and without any substantial question of law, decline to entertain the reference, at this stage. Therefore, at that stage, learned advocate Mr Shah for the assessee did not press for an opinion on this reference, in view of the smallness of the amount involved. Hence this reference is not required to be answered. Accordingly, we decline to answer the question. The reference stands disposed of accordingly. ����......
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Get help with an income-tax notice → 💬 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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan