Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 4]

Karnataka High Court

The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs P S Doraiswamy on 31 July, 2009

Bench: D.V.Shylendra Kumar, Aravind Kumar

ag
$
Q
Q
3
§
X
5%
2
§
fig
§
gm
ag
E
Q
Q
3
§
E
§
§
3

 

mwwanw W? %MW.N&%fiM¥i'*a£% mm-Q3 mmmm »%..::%i,¥" mwmxmma Wméfifi amzm" $3? mwamm MEQM fifififi? Q31" 

IN THE HIGH coax? or KARHATAKA AT__ 
DATED Tms THE 315'? BAY cm  ._ 7' u  

TI-IE nowam MR..1us'r1cE fiv E' §_H*i'LfiflI_5R}_L 
THE Humans MR.Jti's1fiaE ARAVIKIS Kimm
Income    of  

Between:

1. THE c<3:sAMAi:~3s:01~I&:R"0§'j:NC::}ME 91fA3§" ' 
C.R.BUIL{)'fi\1._(3_',-- Q'L3:EEI§JS«R'O'AD'  .. 
BANGALORE;  _._ . '   

2 'THE I1\:>r.:o-Me: TA}: C3sF'i'~"'IC§}R"
WIXRI3 7 .ii5[1] 5i     'V
€_:.R. E3UIL§3ING,VQLI'E§3.NE'§ ROAD
BfiNGALOR'i3 '-~.,_ '    APPELLANTS

 " V {B3 SR: M VSESHACHAM, ADV., 85

 '   SR1. KVARAVIND, ADV.,]

 P 'S«D0§EAISWAMY
" --- mg'? £0,605, ANSAL F€I)R'I'E
 «'1e:.:ja£«:,NA'%T~:%.c;RAHARA
3  HOSUR ROAD
 BA.i'~¥{;}A.LC3RE --- 560 068  RESPONDENT

[SR1 K MALLAHARAO, ADV, FOR SR1. S PARTHASARATHI, ADV. ,1 ' THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC. 260~A GE' i.'}"'.RC'I', 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 18-12-2007 PASSES IN {TA NO. ..,_?,€)68/ENG/200?, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2904-()5, PRAYING T0 FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF' LAW S'I'A'TED THEREIN, ALLOW THE APPEAL APHD SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT BANGALORE IN ETA NO. £068/BNG/2007, DATED 18- 12-2007 CONFIRM THE ORDERS OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSRSNER AND THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARE} - 15H}, II? THE ENFEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUWY AND E'TC.,.

COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURU'AI'I-'OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUI-"I THIS APPEAL COMING on FOR HEAR1NG,..j'rH'1s-I'DAxjfp"

SI-IYLENDRA KUMAR.J., DELIVERED F'OLI.'OWI~hIG; "

Sri. M v Seshachala,

-- revenue has filed a _ to withdraw the appeal in the '-having accepted the law as in the case of comnaqégmaa us. xoommu.

113 I

2. counsel for the respondent has ao' of the appeal.

pp 3. is dismissed as withdrawn.

5d/'J Judg3 Sd/s} Judg?"