Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax-18 v. Shr...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax-18 v. Shri.gaurang P.amin

High Court 02 Apr 2008 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-18 v. Shri.gaurang P.amin
Date of order
02 Apr 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-18 v. Shri.gaurang P.amin, the High Court (2008) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: Appeal is therefore allowed to be withdrawn and dismissed as such.

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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.755 OF 2007 INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.755 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax-18 .. Appellant Vs. Shri.Gaurang P.Amin .. Respondent Mr.R.G.Bhat for the Appellant. None for the Respondent. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATE : 2nd April, 2008 P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant-revenue. As the tax effect involved in this case is less than Rs.4 lakhs, the learned Counsel for the Appellant seeks leave to withdraw this Appeal. Appeal is therefore allowed to be withdrawn and dismissed as such. Permissible Court fees be refunded to the Appellant as per the rules. 2. In view of withdrawal of the Appeal itself, nothing further survives in the Notice of Motion No.1661/2007. Hence, the Notice of Motion No.1661/2007 also stands dismissed. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan