Case LawHigh Court › Wp 474 Of 2019.Doc v. Deputy Commissione...

Wp 474 Of 2019.Doc v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 17 Jun 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Wp 474 Of 2019.Doc v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
17 Jun 2019
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Wp 474 Of 2019.Doc v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2019) decided the matter.

Decision: The Writ Petition is disposed of as withdrawn.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

12 wp 474 of 2019.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.474 OF 2019 Futurestep (Singapore) Pte Ltd. …Petitioner versusDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax,(International Taxation) – 2(3)(1), Mumbaiand Ors. …Respondents …Respondents Mr. Nitesh Joshi I/by Mr. Atul Jasani, for Petitioner. Mr. Charanjeet Chanderpal, for Respondents. CORAM: AKIL KURESHI & S.J. KATHAWALLA, JJ. th JUNE, 2019 DATE: 17 P.C.: 1. The Petitioner has challenged the order of Assessment passed by the Assessing Officer pursuant to a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner stated that to avail alternate appeal remedy,Petitioner would withdraw the Petition. Permission for withdrawal granted. In view ofthe fact that Petitioner was pursuing remedy in the present Petition, if the Petitioner files such Appeal latest by 5th July, 2019, the same shall be entertained on merits,ignoring question of limitation. Needless to add all contentions of both the sides arekept open. The Writ Petition is disposed of as withdrawn. ( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. ) ( AKIL KURESHI, J. ) SSP 1/1
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) 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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan