SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
RAJIV SHAKDHER, MINI PUSHKARNA
Empire Trading Company – Appellant
Versus
Income Tax Officer Ward 29(1) – Respondent


Table of Content
1. conclusion and termination of the writ petition. (Para 1 , 17 , 18)
2. procedure to notify partners and provide material for defense. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 11 , 12 , 14)
3. allegations against the petitioner regarding accommodation entries. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
4. flaws in the petition's framing and decision to set aside order. (Para 9 , 10 , 13)
5. opportunity for partners to present objections post-assessing officer's decision. (Para 15 , 16)

JUDGMENT

[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]

Rajiv Shakdher, J. (ORAL):

CM No.38313/2022

1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 12641/2022 & CM No.38312/2022 [Application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking interim relief]

2. We find from the record, that a formal notice has not been issued in the writ petition.

3. Issue notice.

3.1. Mr Shailendra Singh accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

4. In view of the direction that we propose to pass, Mr Shailendra Singh says that a counter-affidavit need not be filed in the matter.

5. The substantive prayer made in the writ petition reads as follows:

    "(a) Allow the present Writ Petition and issue any writ, order or direction in the nature of c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top