Pinakin Kantilal Patel v. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr
High Court
27 Sep 2017 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newas
Parties
Pinakin Kantilal Patel v. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr
Date of order
27 Sep 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Pinakin Kantilal Patel v. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr, the High Court (2017) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Dond
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYCRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 833 OF 2017INCRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 614 OF 2011
Pinakin Kantilal Patel Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders.
Court’s or Judge’s orders
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Mr. Ganesh Bhujbal for Applicant..Mr. A.A. Palkar, APP for State.
CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J.
DATE : 27[th] September 2017.
P.C.:
1] This is seventh application for seeking permission to travel abroad. Earlier 6 applications were allowed by this Court by its Orders passed during the period from 20.11.2013 to 9.1.2017.
2]Applicant intends to travel abroad and particularly to Bangkok and Japan from 3[rd] October 2017 to 3[rd] December 2017.
3]Perused earlier orders granting permission to travel abroad. In view thereof,
applicant is permitted to travel abroad from 3[rd] October 2017 to 3[rd] December 2017 on the same terms and conditions as was directed by this Court by an Order dated 5[th ]
1 of 2
Dond
2/2
appp.833-2017.sxw
February 2016 in Criminal Application No.58 of 2016.
4]Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
(A.S. GADKARI, J.)
2 of 2
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