The High Court of Delhi dismissed the writ petition as infructuous due to subsequent developments and vacated the interim orders.
Writ petition disposed as infructuous; interim orders vacated.
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.
$~R-9
M/S SATNAM OVERSEAS LTD. ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sanat Kapoor, Advocate.
versus
ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INC ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Junior Counsel for Income Tax with Mr. Sachin Yadav, Advocate.
CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
O R D E R % 14.01.2019
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
SANJEEV NARULA, J.
JANUARY 14, 2019 ss
M/S Satnam Overseas Ltd.
Additional Commissioner of Income Tax
S. Muralidhar
Sanjeev Narula
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
