Appeal heard jointly with a prior case decided via reference; parties agreed to dispose this appeal as per the earlier order. Disposition followed earlier precedent without independent adjudication or remand order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.63 OF 2001
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Mumbai City - XV, Mumbai .. Appellant.
V/s.
Mr.Vineet Doshi .. Respondent.
Mr.Ashok Kotangale i/b. H.D. Rathod for the
appellant.
Mr.A.K. Jasani for the respondent.
CORAM : V.C. DAGA &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 22ND AUGUST, 2005.
P.C. :
1. The learned counsel appearing for both the
parties agreed that the appeal be disposed of in
terms of the order of this Court dated February 26,
2002 passed in the case of CIT V/s.Vikram A. Doshi
reported in [256 ITR 129 (Bombay)]. He further
argued that the question raised in the case of Vikram
Doshi leading to remand has not been raised in this
appeal, as such the appeal be disposed of
accordingly.
2. Considering the joint prayer made, for the
reasons recorded in the said order without there
being any order of remand, this appeal stands
disposed of in terms of the said order with no order
as to costs.
(V.C. DAGA, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
CIT V/s. Vikram A. DoshiReferred¶7
[256 ITR 129 (Bombay)]
Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai City - XV
Mr. Vineet Doshi
V.C. Daga
J.P. Devadhar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court