In The Commissioner Ofincome-Tax City-X, Mumbai v. M/S Colgate Palmolive(I)Ltd, the High Court (2007) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: 4.In view of withdrawal of the Appeal, the notice of motion does not survive and notice of motion stands disposed of accordingly.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) No.741/2004.WITHNOTICE OF MOTION No. 2048/2004
The Commissioner ofIncome-tax City-X, Mumbai.
..Appellant.
Vs.
M/s Colgate Palmolive(I)Ltd. ..Respondent.
Mr Vimal Gupta for the Appellant.
None for the Respondent.
CORAM:DR.S. RADHAKRISHNANAND V.C. DAGA,JJ.DATED:19th June, 2007.
P.C.:-
1.Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
2.The learned counsel for the appellantseeks leave to withdraw the above appeal is allowed to be withdrawn and
appeal.
dismissed as such.
3.Proper court fee be refunded in the
above appeal as per rules.
4.In view of withdrawal of the Appeal, the
notice of motion does not survive and notice
of motion stands disposed of accordingly.
(V.C. DAGA,J.)
(DR.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
The
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