Ia/4099/2022 Of Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax 19 Mumbai v. Narendra Chowdhary
High Court
07 Feb 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Ia/4099/2022 Of Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax 19 Mumbai v. Narendra Chowdhary
Date of order
07 Feb 2024
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Ia/4099/2022 Of Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax 19 Mumbai v. Narendra Chowdhary, the High Court (2024) decided the matter.
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 AT BOMBAYDigitallysigned byPURTIORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONPURTIPRASADPRASADPARABPARABDate:2024.02.0813:48:18+0530INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4099 OF 2022 ININCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 26960 OF 2022
Principal Commissioner ofIncome Tax - 19, Mumbai….Applicant
In the Matter Between
Principal Commissioner ofIncome Tax - 19, Mumbai….Appellant V/s.Narendra Chowdhary …Respondent
----
Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma for Applicant/Appellant.Mr. Abhijeet Khade i/b Mr. Satyajeet P. Dighe for Respondent.
----
CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM & DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATED : 7[th] FEBRUARY 2024
P.C. :
1.Mr. Khade states one Mr. Satyajeet P. Dighe, Mobile Number will file vakalatnama on behalf of respondent within one week
from today. Statement accepted as an undertaking to this court.
2.Mr. Sharma states the Appeal and the Interim Application wasserved on 31[st] January 2024. Mr. Khade states that respondent contactedMr. Dighe only late last night. Therefore, we would proceed on the basisthat respondent have no objection to the condonation of delay application.
3.For reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 56 days is
condoned.
4.Interim Application stands disposed.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.)
(K.R. SHRIRAM, 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.