Shri. Mahila Griha Udyog Lijjat Papad v. Deputy Director Of Income Tax (Exemption)-1(1) And Ors
High Court
31 Jan 2012 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Shri. Mahila Griha Udyog Lijjat Papad v. Deputy Director Of Income Tax (Exemption)-1(1) And Ors
Date of order
31 Jan 2012
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Shri. Mahila Griha Udyog Lijjat Papad v. Deputy Director Of Income Tax (Exemption)-1(1) And Ors, the High Court (2012) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 2The Petition, is accordingly, disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
ASN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2536 OF 2011
Shri. Mahila Griha Udyog Lijjat Papad....Petitioner.Vs.Deputy Director of Income tax (Exemption)-1(1) and ors. ...Respondents.
Mr. P. J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate with Mr. B.V. Jhaveri for the petitioner.Mr. Vimal Gupta for the Respondents.
CORAM : DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD &
M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ.
31JANUARY 2012
PC:
Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue are agreed in stating before the Court that in the present case the grounds for reopening of the assessment are similar to those for reopening the assessment for assessment year 2004-05. The petition filed by the assessee against a Notice dated 21 March 2012 for assessment year 2004-05 has been allowed by a judgment separately delivered today. No further submissions have been urged either by the Petitioner or Respondents. Counsel for the parties are agreed that the judgment delivered in the companion petition will govern the present petition as well. For the reasons already indicated in the Judgment in the companion
petition, the impugned notice dated 21 March 2011 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is quashed and set aside.
2The Petition, is accordingly, disposed of.
3There shall be no order as to costs.
( DR.D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J )
( M.S. SANKLECHA, 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.