Wp/703/2006 Of Bhupendra C. Dalal v. The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd-I) Central Cir.7
High Court
10 Mar 2006 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Wp/703/2006 Of Bhupendra C. Dalal v. The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd-I) Central Cir.7
Date of order
10 Mar 2006
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Wp/703/2006 Of Bhupendra C. Dalal v. The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd-I) Central Cir.7, the High Court (2006) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: The writ petition is dismissed in limine.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.703 OF 2006
Bhupendra C. Dalal .. Petitioner.
V/s.
The Asstt. Commissioner of
Income-tax, (OSD - I),
Central Cir.7 & Others .. Respondents.
Mr.Pradeep Sancheti with Mr.Sameer Dalal for the
petitioner.
Mr.Ashok Kotangale with Mr.Nagarjun for the
respondents.
CORAM : R.M. LODHA &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 10TH MARCH, 2006.
P.C. :
Heard Mr.Pradeep Sancheti, the learned
counsel for the petitioner.
2. That the subject properties have been sold by
the Custodian for recovery of income tax outstanding
against the petitioner is not in dispute. It is also
admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner
that on 2nd March, 2006, the Special Court (Trial of
Offences relating to Transactions in Securities) at
Bombay confirmed the sale of subject properties.
However, the Special Court deferred the
implementation of the confirmation of sale of
2
properties for one week. On 8th March, 2006, the
petitioner sought extension from the Special Court
for deferring the implementation of the order dated
2nd March, 2006. But the said prayer was rejected.
Thus, it is clear that for the recovery of income tax
dues, the subject properties have been sold and the
Special Court has confirmed the sale and that
confirmation has come into operation. In view of
these facts, the order passed by the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal rejecting the application for stay
of demand does not call for any interference in extra
ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India.
3. The writ petition is dismissed in limine.
(R.M. LODHA, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, 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