In The Commissioner Ofincome-Tax City-Xvi, Mumbai v. R. K. Sanghvi, the High Court (2007) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: 4.In view of withdrawal of the Appeal, thenotice of motion does not survive notice of motion stands disposed of and 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.735 of 2004.WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION No. 1753 of 2004
The Commissioner ofIncome-tax City-XVI, Mumbai. ..Appellant.
Vs.
R. K. Sanghvi.
..Respondent.
Mr R.G.Bhat for the Appellant.
Ms A. Vissanji with S.P.Mehta for therespondent.
CORAM:DR.S. RADHAKRISHNANAND V.C. DAGA,JJ.DATED:19th June, 2007.
P.C.:-1.Heardlearnedcounselparties.2.The learned counsel for the appellantseeks leave to withdraw the above appeal. appeal is allowed to be withdrawn and
counselfor the
The
dismissed as such.
3.Proper court fee be refunded in the
above appeal as per rules.
4.In view of withdrawal of the Appeal, thenotice of motion does not survive notice of motion stands disposed of
and
accordingly.
(V.C. DAGA,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.
EaseValue