Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.pr...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.pravin Navin Inv. & Trdg. Co.pvt.ltd

High Court 25 Jun 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.pravin Navin Inv. & Trdg. Co.pvt.ltd
Date of order
25 Jun 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.pravin Navin Inv. & Trdg. Co.pvt.ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: In this view of the matter, both the above appeals stand dismissed for want of substantial question of law.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
bgp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L)NO.48 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.M/s.Pravin Navin Inv. & Trdg. Co.Pvt.Ltd. ..Appellant..Respondent WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL (L)NO.49 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.M/s.Dwarkaprasad Anilkumar Investment Co.Pvt.Ltd. ..Appellant ..Respondent Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for appellant.Mr.B.V.Jhaveri CORAM :- V.C.DAGA &J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. 25[th] June,2009 DATE : P.C. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. In view of reopening done for the subsequent assessment years, the cause of action to proceed with the appeals does not survive. No purpose would be served by condoning the delay in filing the appeals and admitting the same. In this view of the matter, both the above appeals stand dismissed for want of substantial question of law. No order as to costs. In view of dismissal of the appeal, Notices of Motion do not survive. Hence, the same also stand dismissed. (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.) (V.C.DAGA,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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan