Wp/821/2011 Of Malbar Hill Club Limited v. Prakash R. Mane, Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax 5(2) And 4 Ors
High Court
29 Mar 2011 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Wp/821/2011 Of Malbar Hill Club Limited v. Prakash R. Mane, Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax 5(2) And 4 Ors
Date of order
29 Mar 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp/821/2011 Of Malbar Hill Club Limited v. Prakash R. Mane, Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax 5(2) And 4 Ors, the High Court (2011) decided the matter.
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 BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (LOD) NO.606 OF 2011
Malabar Hill Club Ltd...Petitioner.
V/s.
Dr. Commissioner of Income Tax-5(2) & Ors...Respondents.
Mr. J.D. Mistri, senior Advocate with A.K. Jasani for the petitioner.Mr. Abhay Ahuja for the respondents.
P.C. :-
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND SMT. R.S. DALVI, JJ.DATED : 29TH MARCH, 2011
1.The petitioner is aggrieved by the orders dated 2/3/2011 and 15/2/2011 whereby the DCIT as well as the ACIT have declined to stay the demand raised in respect of the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05, 2007-08 and 2008-09. The stay application filed by the petitioner is pending before the CIT. Counsel for the revenue on instructions states that CIT will dispose of the said stay application by 7th April, 2011. Till the disposal of the stay application by the CIT and for a further period of 2 weeks thereafter, the respondents shall not enforce the demand raised in the aforesaid orders.
2.The petition is disposed off in the above terms with no order as
to costs.
(SMT. R.S. DALVI, 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.