Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Raj Hans Towers Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income Tax-V on 15 November, 2016

Bench: Anil R. Dave, A.M. Khanwilkar

     ITEM NO.39                                     COURT NO.2                         SECTION IIIA

                                      S U P R E M E C O U R T O F                I N D I A
                                              RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)                             21378/2015

     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27/01/2015
     in ITA No. 24/2015 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi)

     RAJ HANS TOWERS PVT. LTD.                                                          Petitioner(s)

                                                            VERSUS

     COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V                                                       Respondent(s)

     (with interim relief and office report)

     Date : 15/11/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE
                             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR

     For Petitioner(s)                       Mr. K. Sampath,Adv.
                                             For Mrs. Rani Chhabra,Adv.

     For Respondent(s)                       Mrs. Pinky Anand,ASG
                                             Ms. Jyoti Taneja,Adv.
                                             Ms. Shishank Dewan,Adv.
                                             Mr. Adarsh Tiwari,Adv.
                                             Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv.

                          UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                                  O R D E R

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the findings of fact recorded, more particularly, in paragraph No.10 of the impugned judgment is incorrect and in the circumstances, the petitioner would like to file a review application before the High Court and, therefore, he seeks permission to withdraw this special leave petition.

Permission is granted with the above liberty. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, disposed of as withdrawn.

            (NARENDRA PRASAD)                                               (SNEH BALA MEHRA)
              COURT MASTER                                                 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR