Discussed the matter in an oral order, observing that no substantial question of law arose. The miscellaneous appeal was dismissed with no substantive reasoning provided in the text.
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 PATNA
Miscellaneous Appeal No.185 of 2006
====================================================== 1. Commissioner Of Wealth Tax. .... .... Appellant/s Versus M/S Saran Holdings Pvt.Ltd .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== with Miscellaneous Appeal No.187 of 2006 ====================================================== Commissioner Of Income Tax & A
.... .... Appellant/s Versus M/S Saran Holdings Pvt.Ltd. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In MA No.185 of 2006) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Harswardhan Prasad For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Archana Sinha.. (In MA No.187 of 2006) For the Appellant/s : Mr. For the Respondent/s : Mr.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA VERMA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA VERMA)
Patna High Court MA No.185 of 2006 (6) dt.01-11-2012
2 / 2
6 01-11-2012
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner –appellant and perused the order passed by Division Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna.
In our opinion, no substantial question of law arises to be decided in appeal. Thus the Misc. Appeal is accordingly, dismissed.
(Prakash Chandra Verma, J)
Sudha/-
(Jayanandan Singh, J)
Commissioner Of Wealth Tax
M/S Saran Holdings Pvt.Ltd
Commissioner Of Income Tax
M/S Saran Holdings Pvt.Ltd
Prakash Chandra Verma
Jayanandan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
