Shree Changdeo Sugar Mills Ltd v. Joint Cit
High Court
01 Aug 2008 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Shree Changdeo Sugar Mills Ltd v. Joint Cit
Date of order
01 Aug 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Shree Changdeo Sugar Mills Ltd v. Joint Cit, the High Court (2008) 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.
( 1 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2681 OF 2008
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2681 OF 2008
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2681 OF 2008
IN
IN
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.88 OF 2004
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.88 OF 2004
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.88 OF 2004
Shree Changdeo Sugar Mills Ltd. .. Appellant
Vs.
Joint CIT .. Respondent
Mr.Girish Rao i/by M/s.Lex Consultus for the Appellant.
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the Respondent.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ.
DATE : 1st August, 2008
P.C.
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. By
this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is seeking to
recall our order dated 28th July, 2008 whereby the
Appeal was dismissed in default. Perused the affidavit
in support of the Notice of Motion. For the reasons
stated therein sufficient cause is made out for
recalling our order dated 28th July, 2008. Hence,
Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer
clause (a).
2. Place the Appeal on board for final hearing on
21.8.2008.
(S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,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.