The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ranchi v. M/S. Ashoka Industries
High Court
25 Jul 2013 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · jhar_pg
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ranchi v. M/S. Ashoka Industries
Date of order
25 Jul 2013
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ranchi v. M/S. Ashoka Industries, the High Court (2013) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P No. 354 of 2012
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi
Vs.
M/s. Ashoka Industries
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY
For the Appellant/Petitioner : Mr.D.Roshan For the Respondents : ------
------
Dated 25th July, 2013
Delay condoned.
T.A No.50/2007 was dismissed due to non-removal of the defects and therefore, it was dismissed without notice to the respondent. However, Civil Miscellaneous Petition was filed for restoration of T.A No.50/2007. Since it was a matter between the Court and the appellant and the appeal was not even properly constituted because of several defects, there is no need to issue notice to the respondent.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner on the application for restoration of T.A No.50/2007.
In view of the reasons stated in the order dated 12[th] September, 2012, passed in C.M.P No.460/2011 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Revenue Building, Patna Vs. Md.Sayeed, Ranchi) and in view of the fact that in the present petition also, the facts are similar to that of C.M.P No.460/2011, C.M.P No.354/2012 is allowed and T.A No.50/2007 restored to its original number.
List T.A No.50/2007 along with T.A No.9/2006 for orders after three weeks. Meanwhile, Revenue may remove rest of the defects, except the defect of limitation.
(Prakash Tatia, C.J.)
(Jaya Roy, J.)
dey
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.