LAUREL WIRES LIMITED vs. INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI AND ORS.

PDF · subscribers
WP/14349/2016HC BombayHCBM01017982201607 June 2018Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP KASHINATH SHINDE,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M.S. SANKLECHA1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that since the petitioner failed to appear on two separate occasions when the matter was called out, it indicated a lack of interest in prosecuting the writ petition. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition for non-prosecution. No decision was made on the merits of the case or the underlying ITAT order. The operative direction was to dismiss the petition.

What were the facts?

This is a writ petition filed by Laurel Wires Limited before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. The petition challenges an order or action by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Mumbai, and other respondents. The specific assessment year(s) and the amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history indicates that the matter was called out twice, once in the morning session and again at 3:00 p.m. On both occasions, no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should dismiss the writ petition for non-prosecution when the petitioner fails to appear. Assessee's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment. The petitioner did not appear to argue the case. Revenue's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment. The respondents did not appear to argue the case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Rane * 1/1 * WP--14349-2016 (SR.23)

Thursday, 7.6.2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 14349 OF 2016 Laurel Wires Limited

….Petitioner V/s. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Mumbai and Ors. ….Respondents * * * * * None for the petitioner

CORAM :- CORAM :- M.S. SANKLECHA, & M.S. SANKLECHA, &

SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ. SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.

DATE :- DATE :-

7TH JUNE, 2018. 7TH JUNE, 2018. P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. This petition was called out in the morning session. None appeared in support of the petition. Therefore, the matter was kept back at 3.00 p.m. Thereafter, when the petition was called out at 3.00 p.m. none appears in support of the petition. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting this petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. ( (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J) SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J)

(M.S. SANKLECHA, J) (M.S. SANKLECHA, J)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →