The Pr. Commissioner Of Incometax-2, Nashik v. M/S Rajmal Lakhichand Jewellers Pvt.ltd., Jalgaon
High Court
23 Mar 2018 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hcaurdb
Parties
The Pr. Commissioner Of Incometax-2, Nashik v. M/S Rajmal Lakhichand Jewellers Pvt.ltd., Jalgaon
Date of order
23 Mar 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In The Pr. Commissioner Of Incometax-2, Nashik v. M/S Rajmal Lakhichand Jewellers Pvt.ltd., Jalgaon, the High Court (2018) decided the matter.
Decision: 3.Considering the above, in order dated 12.3.2018, in Income Tax Appeal No.94/2016, in the title cause, Mr Alok Sharma Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant be shown present and paragraph 1 of the said order be deleted.
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,BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4220 OF 2018ININCOME TAX APPEAL NO.94 OF 2016
The PR. Commissioner of IncomeTax-2, Nashik
.. Applicant
Versus
M/s Rajmal Lakhichand Jewellers Pvt.Ltd., Jalgaon.. Respondent
Mr Alok Sharma, Sr.Standing Counsel for applicant Mr S.P. Shah, Advocate for respondent
CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA & A.M. DHAVALE, JJ
PER COURT
DATE : 23rd March 2018
1.Motion is made on the ground that the Advocate for the appellant
was present on 12.3.2018, but inadvertently, is marked absent.
2.The learned Counsel for the non-applicant/original respondent also accepts the said fact.
3.Considering the above, in order dated 12.3.2018, in Income Tax Appeal No.94/2016, in the title cause, Mr Alok Sharma Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant be shown present and paragraph 1 of the said order be deleted.
4.Civil Application disposed of.
( A.M. DHAVALE, J.)
( S.V. GANGAPURWALA, 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