The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.saurashtra Fulels P. Ltd
High Court
31 Mar 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.saurashtra Fulels P. Ltd
Date of order
31 Mar 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.saurashtra Fulels P. Ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
(-1-)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.989 OF 2009
WITH
INCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.1163 of 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax....Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Saurashtra Fulels P. Ltd. ...Respondent
Mr. Vimal Gupta with Mr. P.S. Sahadevan, for the
Appellant.
Mrs. Beena Pillai i/b. Niraj Punamiya for the
Respondent.
CORAM: F.I.
CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&R.S.MOHITE, JJ.DATED: MARCH 31, 2009
R.S.MOHITE, JJ.
DATED: MARCH 31, 2009
P.C.:
P.C.:
. Considering the cause shown and subject to
appellants paying to the respondents cost quantified
at Rs.2500/- within six weeks from today and
removing office objections, if any within the
stipulated period, office to register the appeal.
On failure to pay the cost or remove the office
objections, motion to stand dismissed for non
prosecution without further reference to this court.
(R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, 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