Nma/112/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 8, Mumbai v. M/S. Jacob H And G Pvt. Ltd
High Court
25 Mar 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/112/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 8, Mumbai v. M/S. Jacob H And G Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
25 Mar 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Nma/112/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 8, Mumbai v. M/S. Jacob H And G Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Considering the cause shown in the affidavit, in our opinion, the impugned order is set aside.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
K.J. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
1. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.112 OF 2009
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1041 OF 2007
2. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.113 OF 2009
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.711 OF 2000
3. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.114 OF 2009
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1063 OF 2007
4. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.140 OF 2009
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1013 OF 2007
5. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.141 OF 2009
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1005 OF 2007
6. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.142 OF 2009
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1006 OF 2007
7. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.143 OF 2009
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1029 OF 2007
8. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.144 OF 2009
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.23 OF 2003
9. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.187 OF 2009
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.320 OF 2006
10. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.570 OF 2009
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1125 OF 2008
11. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.604 OF 2009
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.708 OF 2008
: 2 :
12. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.640 OF 2009
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.306 OF 2006
13. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.650 OF 2009
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.761 OF 2008
14. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.667 OF 2009
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.858 OF 2008
(SERIAL NOS.3 TO 11 AND 13 TO 17)
----------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, office
Memorandum of Coram Court’s or Judge’s orders
appearance, Court’s
orders & Prothonotary’s
orders
----------------------------------------------------
Mr.Suresh Kumar with P.S.Sahadevan
for appellants in Sr.Nos.3, 4, 5, 13.
Mr.Subhash S.Shetty for respondents
in Sr.No.3 & 5.
Mr.U.V.Boomer i/by Shaunak Satpure &
Co. for respondents in Sr.No.4.
Devki Iyer for appellants in Sr.Nos.6
to 10.
Mr.A.K.Jasani for respondents in
Sr.Nos.6, 7 & 8.
Mr.J.D.Mistri with P.C.Tripathi &
Raj Darak for respondents in
Sr.Nos.9 & 10.
Mrs.Anuradha Mane for the appellant
in Sr.No.11.
Mr.Pankaj R.Toprani for respondents
in sr.no.13.
Mr.R.A.Vaishyampan for the appellant
at sr.no.14.
Ms.Beena Pillai i/by D.M.Harish &
: 3 :
Co. for respondents in sr.no.14.
Mr.B.M.Chatterji i/by Anamika
Malhotra for the appellant in
sr.no.15.
Mr.V.C.Muralidharan i/by Joy Legal
Consultants for respondents in
sr.no.15.
Mr.R.Asokan for the appellant in
sr.no.16.
Ms.Aasifa Khan for respondents in
sr.no.16.
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan & R.A.Vaishampayan
for the appellant in sr.no.17.
Ms.Suvarna Shendkar i/by S.G.Dalal
for respondents in sr.no.17.
----
Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ
Date : 25.3.2009.
PC
1. The appeals were dismissed for
non appearance of Counsel on behalf
of the revenue. Considering the
cause shown in the affidavit, in our
opinion, the impugned order is set
aside. Appeals restored to file.
(R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)
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.