Case Law › High Court › Uday Nath Sharma v. Bihar State Electric...

Uday Nath Sharma v. Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna

High Court 21 Jun 2010 In favour of: Revenue

Forum / Bench

High Court · patnahcucisdb94

Parties

Date of order

21 Jun 2010

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In Uday Nath Sharma v. Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

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 PATNA MJC No.99 of 2010 UDAY NATH SHARMA S/O LATE SUMER SHARMA, R/O VILL. AND P.O.- AMAON, P.S.- CHAINPUR, DISTT,- KAIMUR (BHABUA) ---Petitioner Versus 1. BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATNA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN NAMELY R.K.SHARMA, BIDYUT-BHAWAN, INCOME TAX GOLAMBER, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER-CUM-CHIEF ENGINEER, MAGADH ELECTRIC SUPPLY AREA, GAYA NAMELY N.P.K. SINHA. 3. THE ELECTRICAL EXECUTIVE ENGINEER NAMELY DINESH PRASAD SRIVASTAVA, ELECTRIC SUPPLY DIVISION, BHABUA, DISTT.- KAIMUR. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ACCOUNTS NAMELY B.K. NIRALA, MAGADH ELECTRIC SUPPLY AREA, GAYA. 5.THE ADMINISTRATOR, G.P.F. TRUST (HEADQUARTER)NAMELY, AKHILESHWAR PRASAD, BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATNA. 6. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, NAMELY- ANUP MUKHERJEE. --Opp. Parties ----------- 5. 21.6.2010 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the opposite party-Board is present. It is submitted that the admissible payments have been made to the petitioner through different cheques. However, since none has appeared on behalf of the petitioner, this application is dismissed for want of prosecution. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)

Facing a similar income-tax issue?

Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.

✅ Get help with an income-tax notice → 💬 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.