Income Tax Case
High Court
06 May 2009 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · patnahcucisdb94
Parties
— v. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), Patna
Date of order
06 May 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In v. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), Patna, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5752 of 2009
SANTOSH KUMAR JHA son of Sri Hbagwan Lal Jha,
R/O village-Sangi, P.S.Pulparas,Distt-Madhubani
----Petitioner.
Versus
1.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), Patna
2.Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Patna. ---Respondents.
-----------
For the petitioner : Mr. Y.V.Giri, with
Senior Advocate Mr.Ranjan Kumar Jha
For the respondents : Mr. Harshwardhan Prasad
Ms.Archana Sinha,AC to SC.
---------
2.
06.5.2009.
Against the assessment order passed by the
Assessing Authority, appeal was filed by the petitioner before the Appellate Authority.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
appeal shall not be decided by the direction of this Court in C.W.J.C.No.11974 of 2007. It is further stated that as a consequential relief, demand of tax has to be stayed till the disposal of the appeal.
It is for the appellant to approach the appropriate authority for stay the demand of
income tax as he has got a case for granting that
realief.
It is contended by the Revenue that the petitioner is also trying to protract the proceeding of appeal by one way or the other and further C.W.J.C No.11934 of 2007 is not an impediment in disposal of the appeal.
If the compliance of the directions of this Court passed in C.W.J.C.No.11974 of 2007 is necessary, it is for the petitioner to make that prayer before the appellate authority. All contentions raised are required to be considered by the appellate authority
We find no grounds in the present application and it is dismissed in limine.
(J.B.Koshi, CJ)
ahk
(Dr.Ravi Ranjan,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.