Case Law › High Court › Cres/218/2015 Of Commissioner Of Income...

Cres/218/2015 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Badru Khan And Party

High Court 02 Aug 2016 In favour of: Revenue

Forum / Bench

High Court · jaipur

Parties

Date of order

02 Aug 2016

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Allowed

Case summary

In Cres/218/2015 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Badru Khan And Party, the High Court (2016) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHANJAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O.R.D.E.R D.B. Civil Misc. Restoration Application No.218/2015In D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.107/2006 Date of Order: 02/08/2016 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. RANKA Mr. Anuroop Singhi Adv. for applicant. Office objections stand overruled. Application has been filed for recalling/restoration of the D.B.Income Tax Appeal No.107/2006 which was dismissed on account ofnon-compliance of per-emptory order of the Court & that apartapplication has been filed seeking condonation of delay u/S 5 ofLimitation Act. After taking note of the submissions made, we find that thedelay has been satisfactorily explained & sufficient justification hasbeen offered for restoration of the appeal. Accordingly, the application seeking condonation of delay u/S 5of Limitation Act & restoration application both are allowed subjectto depositing Rs.1,000/- by the applicant with the Secretary,Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jaipur and on his doing theappeal be restored to its original number. Office to proceed & list themain appeal on 8-8-2016, as prayed. (J.K. RANKA), J. (AJAY RASTOGI), J. S Kumawat/-

Facing a similar income-tax issue?

Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.

✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA

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.