Pride Foramer S.a.s v. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-I, Dehradun Dehradun
High Court
06 May 2006 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · ukhcucis_pg
Parties
Pride Foramer S.a.s v. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-I, Dehradun Dehradun
Date of order
06 May 2006
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Pride Foramer S.a.s v. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-I, Dehradun Dehradun, the High Court (2006) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: The petition is dismissed accordingly.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
COURT NO.2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 411 (M/B) of 2005
Pride Foramer S.A.S. C/o S.P. Puri & Co., 4/18, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi
… Petitioner
Vs
1. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-I, Dehradun Dehradun
2. Commissioner of Income Tax, Dehradun
… Respondents
Dated: May 06, 2006
Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J.
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for writ of certiorari quashing the impugned illegal notices and orders issued by Respondent No.1 (Annexure Nos. 1 and 2 to the writ petition).
2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Respondents in which a plea has been taken that the order impugned is appellable.
3. In the light of the submission made by learned counsel for respondents in the counter affidavit, we have examined the facts stated in the writ petition. A perusal of the writ petition indicates that the factual question is involved in this writ petition which cannot be gone into the proceedings under Article 226 of Constitution of India. Therefore, the petitioner is relegated to avail the remedy of appeal.
4. The petition is dismissed accordingly. Interim order, passed by this Court is hereby vacated. However, it is provided that in case that the petitioner avails the remedy of appeal, the appeal shall be decided within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
(B.C. Kandpal, J.)
Rajeev Dang
(P.C. Verma, 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.