Case LawHigh Court › Wp/2635/2008 Of M/S. Aramex India Privat...

Wp/2635/2008 Of M/S. Aramex India Private Limited v. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Range-8(1) And 2 Others

High Court 03 Dec 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Wp/2635/2008 Of M/S. Aramex India Private Limited v. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Range-8(1) And 2 Others
Date of order
03 Dec 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp/2635/2008 Of M/S. Aramex India Private Limited v. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Range-8(1) And 2 Others, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.

Decision: Subject to what is stated above, the petition is disposed of with no order as to costs.

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 BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2635 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.2635 OF 2008 Aramex India Pvt. ..Petitioner. V/s. Asstt.Commissioner of Income-tax & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr.K.Gopal with Jitendra Singh for petitioner. Mr.Suresh Kumar for respondents. CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 3RD DECEMBER, 2008. P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The grievance of the petitioner is that the objection lodged by the petitioner against the reassessment notice has not been decided by the assessing officer and till the same is decided, the proceedings of reassessment should not be proceeded further. 2. Learned counsel for the department states that the objection of the petitioner is not yet decided and till the same is decided, no action will be taken on the basis of the proposed notice. The statement of the learned counsel is accepted. The respondents are directed to take appropriate decision on the objection raised by the petitioner and till the - = : 2 : = - objection is decided, no reassessment proceedings should be undertaken. 3. We make it clear that we have not expressed our opinion on the merits of the matter and the assessing officer may decide the objection raised by the petitioner in accordance with law, without being influenced by this order. 4. Subject to what is stated above, the petition is disposed of with no order as to costs. (P.B.MAJMUDAR (P.B.MAJMUDARJ.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
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