Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S.indian Express Properties P.ltd
High Court
20 Feb 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S.indian Express Properties P.ltd
Date of order
20 Feb 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S.indian Express Properties P.ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: As the motion for condoning delay is dismissed, appeal also stands dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1995 OF 2007
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.555 OF 2007
Commissioner of Income-tax- ..Appellant
Versus
M/s.Indian Express Properties P.Ltd., ..Respondent
----
Vimal Gupta & P.S.Sahadevan for the appellant.
Poorvi Kamani for the respondent.
----
Coram : F.I.Rebello &
R.S.Mohite,JJ
Date : 20.02.2008
PC
1. This is a motion for condoning 669 days delay in
filing of the main appeal. A perusal of the
affidavit-in-support indicates that the file was
sent to the Panel Counsel for preparing draft appeal
memo on 4.5.2005 and the appeal was ultimately filed
on 7.3.2007. No dates have been given in respect of
the events which occurred between the aforesaid two
dates. In our view, cause shown does not amount to
sufficient cause. Hence motion dismissed.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.555 OF 2007
. As the motion for condoning delay is dismissed,
appeal also stands dismissed.
(R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)
(R.S.Mohite,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