Case LawHigh Court › The Director Of Income Tax, Mumbai v. Su...

The Director Of Income Tax, Mumbai v. Sushmavati Educational Trust, Mumbai

High Court 20 Aug 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Director Of Income Tax, Mumbai v. Sushmavati Educational Trust, Mumbai
Date of order
20 Aug 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Director Of Income Tax, Mumbai v. Sushmavati Educational Trust, Mumbai, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Hence, in view of utter callousness on the part of the Appellant, the Appeal stands dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.573 OF 2000 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.573 OF 2000 The Director of Income Tax, Mumbai .. Appellant Vs. Sushmavati Educational Trust, Mumbai .. Respondent Mr.R.A.Vaishampayan with Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for Appellant. None for the Respondent. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ. DATE : 20th August, 2008 DATE : 20th August, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. On 17.7.2008 this Appeal was adjourned to 24.7.2008 to enable the learned Advocate for the Appellant to file vakalatnama and to serve the Respondent. Again on 24.7.2008 two weeks time was granted and the Appeal came to be adjourned to 7.8.2008. 2. Even on 7.8.2008 the vakalatnama was not filed and the Respondents were not served, and hence we had adjourned this Appeal to 14.8.2008. Though on 7.8.2008 it was assured by Mr.Vaishampayan that the Respondents would be served within a period of one week from that day, till today the vakalatnama has not been filed on behalf of the Appellant, and no steps whatsoever have been taken by the Appellant to serve the Respondents. Mr.Vaishampayan is unable to point out as to what steps Appellant has taken to serve the Respondents. Hence, in view of utter callousness on the part of the Appellant, the Appeal stands dismissed. (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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan