The Commissioner Of Income Tax2 vs. Tech Mahindr Limited(Formerly Mahindra British Telecom Ltd) Director
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
SECTION IIIA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 7853, 7854, 8789, 8791 AND 8912 OF 2012 AND CIVIL APPEALS NO. 4293, 4543 AND 10830 OF 2014, 8229 AND 288 OF 2015, 8922, 8923 AND 8924 OF 2013
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE & ANR. ....APPELLANTS
VERSUS
M/S ADITI TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. ….RESPONDENT
OFFICE REPORT
C.A. Nos. 7853, 8789 and 8791 of 2012
The office report is prepared as per circular No. F. 41/ Jul./ 2008 dated 17th December, 2008.
- A) There is sole respondent in the matters abovementioned and is represented through Counsel.
- B) Not applicable.
- C) No application for substitution is pending.
- D) Both the parties have filed Statement of Case
- E) Not applicable.
C.A. Nos. 7854 of 2012 and 4543 and of 2014
- A) There is sole respondent in the matters abovementioned and is represented through Counsel.
- B) Not applicable.
- C) No application for substitution is pending.
- D) Both the parties have not filed Statement of Case so far, time has been expired as per Amended New Rule, vide order XIX, Rule 32(1)(2), it shall be presumed that the Counsel for both the parties do not desire to lodge Statement of Case in the appeal.
E) Not applicable.
C.A. No. 8912 of 2012
- A) There is sole respondent in the matter abovementioned and is represented through Counsel.
- B) Not applicable.
- C) No application for substitution is pending.
- D) Counsel for the Respondent has filed Statement of Case while counsel for the Appellant has not filed Statement of Case so far, time has been expired as per Amended New Rule, vide order XIX, Rule 32(1)(2), it shall be presumed that the Counsel for the Appellant does not desire to lodge Statement of Case in the appeal.
- E) Not applicable.
C.A. No. 4293 of 2014
- A) There is sole respondent in the matter abovementioned and is served through High Court but no one has entered appearance so far.
- B) Not applicable.
- C) No application for substitution is pending.
- D) Both the parties have not filed Statement of Case so far, time has been expired as per Amended New Rule, vide order XIX, Rule 32(1)(2), it shall be presumed that the Counsel for both the parties do not desire to lodge Statement of Case in the appeal.
- E) Not applicable.
C.A. No. 10830 of 2014
It is submitted that Notice of Lodgement of Petition of Appeal was issued to the sole respondent through High Court. But High Court vide it's letter dated 5th March, 2015 stated that Notice could not be served to the sole respondent for want of latest and correct address. Counsel for the Appellant has been informed on 20th April, 2015 to furnish the latest and correct address of the sole respondent but she has not done the needful so far.
Service of Notice is incomplete.
C.A. NO. 8229 OF 2015
The office report is prepared as per circular No. F. 41/ Jul./ 2008 dated 17th December, 2008.
- A) There are two respondents in the matter abovementioned and both are represented through Counsel.
- B) Not applicable.
- C) No application for substitution is pending.
- D) Both the parties have not filed Statement of Case so far.
- E) Not applicable.
- F) Matter is ready for prefinal hearing.
C.A. NO. 288 OF 2015
- A) There is sole respondent in the matter abovementioned and is represented through Counsel.
- B) Not applicable.
- C) No application for substitution is pending.
- D) Both the parties have not filed Statement of Case so far.
- E) Not applicable.
- F) Matter is ready for prefinal hearing.
C.A. NO. 8922 OF 2013
-
A) There is sole respondent in the matter abovementioned and is represented through Counsel.
-
B) Not applicable.
-
C) No application for substitution is pending.
-
D) Counsel for the Appellant has filed Statement of Case but counsel for the Respondent has not filed Statement of Case so far, time has been expired as per Amended New Rule, vide order XIX, Rule 32(1)(2), it shall be presumed that the Counsel for the Respondent does not desire to lodge Statement of Case in the appeal.
-
E) Not applicable.
-
F) Matter is ready for prefinal hearing.
C.A. NOS. 8923 AND 8924 OF 2015
- A) There is sole respondent in both the matters abovementioned. Service complete at SLP stage but no one has entered appearance so far.
- B) Not applicable.
- C) No application for substitution is pending.
- D) Both the parties have not filed Statement of Case till date. Time expired.
- E) Not applicable.
- F) Matter is ready for prefinal hearing.
The matters abovementioned are listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court for prefinal hearing except C.A. No. 10830 of 2014.
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2015.
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
Copy to:
Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Advocate Mr. V. Balachandran, Advocate Ms. Meera Mathur, Advocate M/S. Karanjawala & Co., Advocate Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Advocate Mr. Senthil Jagadeesan, Advocate Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Advocate