Central-Iv, Mumbai v. Pidilite Ind. Limited
High Court
03 Sep 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Central-Iv, Mumbai v. Pidilite Ind. Limited
Date of order
03 Sep 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Central-Iv, Mumbai v. Pidilite Ind. Limited, the High Court (2007) allowed the appeal.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
AGK 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICITON
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2918 OF 2005
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1170 OF 2005
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Central-IV, Mumbai .. Applicant.
Versus
Pidilite Ind. Limited .. Respondent.
Mr.B.M. Chatterjee with Mrs.P.P. Bhosale for the
applicant.
Mr.Pritesh Rajgoar i/by PDS Legal for the
respondent.
CORAM : F.I. REBELLO &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 3RD SEPTEMBER, 2007.
P.C. :
1. Delay is less than 200 days. Considering
the practical difficulties which the Department was
facing including referring the matters to the Law
Department, Government of India for drafting the
appeal memo and considering the affidavit in support
of the notice of motion, in our opinion, cause shown
would amount to sufficient cause. Hence, delay
condoned. The Notice of Motion is allowed in terms
of prayer clause (a).
2. Office to register the appeal.
AGK 2
(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.
EaseValue