The Cit-24 v. Mrs.sarita Patil
High Court
07 Oct 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Cit-24 v. Mrs.sarita Patil
Date of order
07 Oct 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Cit-24 v. Mrs.sarita Patil, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In view thereof, for the very same reasons as recorded in the order dated 6.10.2008 passed in ITXA 925/2008 and ITXA 962/2008, the present Appeal also stands dismissed as this Appeal also does not raise any substantial question of law.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1158 OF 2008
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1158 OF 2008
The CIT-24 .. Appellant
Vs.
Mrs.Sarita Patil .. Respondent
Mr.N.A.Kazi for the Appellant.
None for the Respondent.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & V.C.DAGA, JJ.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
V.C.DAGA, JJ.
DATE : 7th October, 2008
DATE : 7th October, 2008
DATE : 7th October, 2008
P.C.
P.C.
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant. None
appears for the Respondent. The learned Counsel for the
Appellant has pointed out that this Court in the case of
very same assessee has passed an order on 6.10.2008
i.e.in ITXA 925/2008 and ITXA 962/2008 whereby this
Court has dismissed both the Appeals. In view thereof,
for the very same reasons as recorded in the order dated
6.10.2008 passed in ITXA 925/2008 and ITXA 962/2008, the
present Appeal also stands dismissed as this Appeal also
does not raise any substantial question of law.
(V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(V.C.DAGA,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.
EaseValue