In In The Matter Between Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax – 2 v. Central Bank Of India, the High Court (2017) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
pmw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.1832 OF 2017
ININCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.793 OF 2017
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax - 2
… Applicant
In the matter betweenPr. Commissioner of Income Tax – 2Vs.Central Bank of India
… Appellant
… Respondent
Ms. Priyanka Tiwari i/by Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Applicant.Mr. Tejas Shah for the Respondent.
CORAM : A.S. OKA &
A.K. MENON, JJ.
DATE : 4[th] DECEMBER, 2017
P.C.
1Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. In view of the averments made in the affidavit in support sufficient cause is made out to condone the delay of 35 days. Accordingly, Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
(A.K. MENON, J)
(A.S. OKA, 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