G.n.hegde v. The Deputy Commissioner Of
High Court
28 Apr 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
G.n.hegde v. The Deputy Commissioner Of
Date of order
28 Apr 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In G.n.hegde v. The Deputy Commissioner Of, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.1255 OF 2008in
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2946 OF 2007G.N.Hegde ..AppellantVs.
The Deputy Commissioner of.. RespondentsCentral Circle -34 Mumbai
Mr.Sameer Dalal for AppellantMr.P.S.Sahadevan for Respondents
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant andthe respondents.
2. By this appeal, filed by the
appellant-assessee, the appellant is seekingcondonation of 248 days delay in filing this aboveappeal. There is no affidavit controverting thestatements made in the affidavit in support of thenotice of motion. For the reasons stated in para5 to 10 therein, sufficient cause is made out forcondonation of delay and there is no case ofinaction, negligence or want of bonafide on thepart of the appellant. Hence, Notice of motion ismade absolute in terms of prayer cause (a).
3. Appeal to come on board for admission in themonth of September, 2008 subject to numbering.
(A.V. Nirgude,J)
(Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, 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