Case Law › High Court › The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax...

The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Bangalore v. M/S. Timblo Pvt. Ltd

High Court 15 Dec 2016 In favour of: Unclear

Forum / Bench

High Court · hcbgoa

Parties

Date of order

15 Dec 2016

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Bangalore v. M/S. Timblo Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2016) decided the matter.

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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 968 OF 2016INTAX APPEAL NO. 91 OF 2015 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), BANGALORE., Versus M/S. TIMBLO PVT. LTD., ... Applicant... Respondent Mr. K. Aravind, Senior Central Govt. Standing Counsel with Ms.Amira Abdul Razaq, and Ms. Asha Desai, Advocates for theapplicants. Mr. Narendra Sharma, Mr. P. Sawant and Ms. K. Naik,Advocates for the respondent. -Coram:SMT. R. P. SONDURBALDOTA & C. V. BHADANG, JJ. -Date:15th December, 2016 P.C.: Mr. K. Aravind states that the only reason for filing this application is the apprehension felt by the Assessing Officer as regards continuation of the interim order dated 12th January,2016 in view of the subsequent order dated 29th August, 2016. Reference to para 7 of that order is sufficient to know that theapprehension is baseless. In the circumstances, Mr. Aravinddoes not press for the application. The same is accordinglydisposed off. C. V. BHADANG, J. SMT. R. P. SONDURBALDOTA, 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.