Case Law › High Court › Ramesh Kothari v. Inder

Ramesh Kothari v. Inder

High Court 18 Nov 2016 In favour of: Unclear

Forum / Bench

High Court · cghccisdb

Parties

Date of order

18 Nov 2016

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Ramesh Kothari v. Inder, the High Court (2016) dismissed the appeal.

Decision: Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR ORDER SHEET WP (T) No. 4 of 2007 Ramesh Kothari S/o Late Shri Aaskaran Kothari, Proprieter, Of M/s Jailaxmi Jewelers, Gandhi Chowk, District-Durg (CG). ---- Petitioner Versus 1. Commissioner of Income Tax Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue, Aykar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur. 2. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhilai Range, New Civil Centre, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (CG). 3. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Bhiai Range, Dist. Durg (CG). 4. Income Tax Officer-III, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Bhilai Range, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (CG). 5. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (I), Office of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (CG). -----Respondents 18/11/2016None for the petitioner. None for the respondents.In the absence of any representation on behalf of the petitioner, this court is left with no other option but to dismiss the case for want of prosecution. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Interim relief granted earlier stands vacated. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE Inder

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.