The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Dr.shri.dharamsi Rajesh Devji
High Court
17 Sep 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Dr.shri.dharamsi Rajesh Devji
Date of order
17 Sep 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Dr.shri.dharamsi Rajesh Devji, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Hence, the Appeal stands dismissed for want of service.
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.935 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
..Appellant
Vs.
Dr.Shri.Dharamsi Rajesh Devji
..Respondent
Mrs.Devki Iyer i/b.Mr.Vimal Gupta for the Appellant.None for the Respondent.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ.DATE : 17TH SEPTEMBER, 2008
P.C.
1.Mrs.Devki Iyer, the learned Counsel for the
Appellant had appeared on 27th August,2008 and tooktime to serve the Respondent and accordingly, we hadadjourned the matter to 10th September,2008 to enablethe Appellant to serve the Respondent. However on10th September,2008 Mrs.Iyer again took time to serve
the Respondent and the matter stood adjourned to
today.
2.However, today Mrs.Iyer states that the
Appellant has not even given her the papers in theabove matter to serve the Respondent. In view of thecallous attitude of the Appellant, we are constrained
to dismiss the above Appeal. Hence, the Appeal stands
dismissed for want of service.
(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.