Case Law › High Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Heard...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Heard Theheard Thelearned Counsel Forlearned Counsel Fortheparties

High Court 23 Sep 2008 In favour of: Unclear

Forum / Bench

High Court · newos

Parties

Date of order

23 Sep 2008

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Heard Theheard Thelearned Counsel Forlearned Counsel Fortheparties, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.

Decision: Appellant, we are inclined to dismiss both the above Appeals 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.908 OF 2008WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.909 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Vs.Bajaj Hindustan Ltd.Mrs.Devki Iyer for the Appellant.Ms.V.B.Patel for the Respondent. ..Appellant ..Respondent CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ.DATE : 23RD SEPTEMBER, 2008 P.C. Appellant, we are inclined to dismiss both the above Appeals for want of service. (S.J.KATHAWALLA,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.