Shri Shankar Madhaorao Patil v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Nagpur & Anr
High Court
25 Aug 2015 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · testcase
Parties
Shri Shankar Madhaorao Patil v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Nagpur & Anr
Date of order
25 Aug 2015
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Shri Shankar Madhaorao Patil v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Nagpur & Anr, the High Court (2015) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYNAGPUR BENCH : NAGPURWRIT PETITION NO. 1683 OF 2014
(Shri Shankar Madhaorao Patil vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Nagpur & Anr.)
Office Notes, Office Memoranda ofCoram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.
Court's or Judge's orders
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI &P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ.AUGUST 25, 2015.
Shri Jaiswal, learned counsel for thepetitioner and Shri Parchure, learned counsel for therespondents.
The learned counsel for the petitioner statesthat notice for reopening under Section 148 of theIncome-tax Act has been questioned before this Court.In the meanwhile, the fresh assessment orders havebeen passed and those orders have been questionedbefore the Competent authority in accordance with law.He, therefore, seeks leave to withdraw the petition withliberty to raise contentions before the said authority.
Shri Parchure, learned counsel appearing forthe respondents submits that grounds available in lawcan always be raised before the Competent authority.
This Court has not still applied its mind tothe merits of the controversy. In this situation, therequest made by the petitioner is allowed. Writ Petitionis disposed of by keeping all rival contentions open andwith liberty to the petitioner to raise it before theCompetent authority in accordance with law.
JUDGE
JUDGE
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.