Gitesh G. Mundhra, Jalgaon v. The Income Tax Officer, Jalgaon
High Court
18 Dec 2017 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hcaurdb
Parties
Gitesh G. Mundhra, Jalgaon v. The Income Tax Officer, Jalgaon
Date of order
18 Dec 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Gitesh G. Mundhra, Jalgaon v. The Income Tax Officer, Jalgaon, the High Court (2017) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABADCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15947 of 2015 IN
INCOME-TAX APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 33017 OF 2015
Gitesh G. Mundhra, Jalgaon. ..APPLICANT
VERSUS
The Income Tax Officer, Jalgaon
...RESPONDENT
Mr Kalyan Patil, Adv., holding for Mr Abhay Kolte, Adv. for applicant
CORAM: PRASANNA B. VARALE, AND SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ. DATE : 18[th] December 2017
ORAL ORDER :
Heard Mr Kalyan Patil, learned Advocate, holding for Mr Kolte, Advocate for applicant. The applicant prays for condonation of delay of 44 days, caused in filing appeal. The applicant has raised substantial grounds in the appeal and though the appellant/applicant wanted to file appeal as early as possible but for his ill-health, the applicant/appellant could not file appeal within stipulated period. It is submitted that applicant was suffering from herpes and he was advised to take complete rest.
In view of the submissions of learned Counsel for the
applicant as well as for the reasons stated in the application, more particularly, in paragraph No. 6, this application is allowed. Delay caused in filing the appeal is condoned.
Post the appeal for Admission on 22[nd] January 2018.
( SUNIL K. KOTWAL ) JUDGE.
Madkar
( PRASANNA B. VARALE ) JUDGE.
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.