In Kaushik v. Chedda, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal.
Decision: 3.Though we have condoned the delay, the appellant is directed to remove the officeobjections, if any, within four weeks from todayfailing which appeal to stand dismissed for nonprosecution without further reference to the court.
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 JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4164 OF 2005
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL(L)NO.1719 OF 2005
The Commissioner of Income Tax-22..Appellant Mumbai
Kaushik V. Chedda..RespondentMumbai
Mr.P.K.Sharma,Advocate, for Appellant None for Respondent
DATE : 4TH FEBRUARY, 2008
P.C.
delay in filing the appeal stands condoned. Officeto number the appeal and list the same foradmission.
2.It is made clear that if this notice ofmotion has not been properly served on therespondent then the respondent will have liberty tomove this Court for re-call of this order.
3.Though we have condoned the delay, the
appellant is directed to remove the officeobjections, if any, within four weeks from todayfailing which appeal to stand dismissed for nonprosecution without further reference to the court.
(R.S.MOHITE, J.)
(F.I.REBELLO, 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