In The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-Ii, Mumbai v. M/S.harsha Estate Pvt.ltd, the High Court (2008) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ.DATE : 5TH AUGUST, 2008 .As the tax liability involved in the above isless than Rs.4/- lac, the learned Counsel for theAppellant seeks leave to withdraw the above Appeal.The Appeal is allowed to be withdrawn and dismissed assuch. .Permissible Court Fee...
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.492 OF 2002
The Commissioner of Income Tax,Central-II, Mumbai.Vs.M/s.Harsha Estate Pvt.Ltd.
..Appellant
..Respondent
Mr.B.M.Chatterjee for the Appellant.Mr.A.K.Jasani for the Respondent.
P.C.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ.DATE : 5TH AUGUST, 2008
.As the tax liability involved in the above isless than Rs.4/- lac, the learned Counsel for theAppellant seeks leave to withdraw the above Appeal.The Appeal is allowed to be withdrawn and dismissed assuch.
.Permissible Court Fees be refunded to the
Appellant, as per rules.
(S.J.KATHAWALLA,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