The Commissioner Of Income Tax-7, Mumbai v. M/S.sulphur Mills Limited
High Court
23 Jan 2009 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-7, Mumbai v. M/S.sulphur Mills Limited
Date of order
23 Jan 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-7, Mumbai v. M/S.sulphur Mills Limited, the High Court (2009) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: Failure on the part of the Appellant to remove office objections and/or to serve the respondents, Appeals shall, accordingly stand dismissed without any further reference to the Court.
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 (L) NO.752 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax-7, MumbaiVersusM/s.Sulphur Mills Limited
..Appellant.
..Respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1053 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax-3, MumbaiVersusM/s.Mukand Limited
..Appellant.
..Respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1089 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax-VII, Mumbai..Appellant.
VersusM/s.Penwalt India Limited
..Respondent.
Mr.P.S. Sahadevan for the appellant.
Ms.Vasanti B. Patel for the respondent in I.Tx.Appeal (L) No.1053/2008.None for the Respondent in I.Tx.Appeal (L) No.752/2008 & 1089/2008.
CORAM : V.C. DAGA &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATE : 22nd JUNE, 2009
P.C. :
Appellant is directed to remove office objections, if any, and serve the respondents within four weeks from today.
Hamdast allowed. In addition to hamdast service, private service by R.P.A.D. / Speed Post is permitted.
Failure on the part of the Appellant to remove office objections and/or to serve the respondents, Appeals shall, accordingly stand dismissed without any further reference to the Court.
(J.P. Devadhar, J.)
(V.C. Daga, 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