M.s.sanklecha, Jj v. Priya Soparkar

Priya Soparkar 1907 nma 725-18 in itxal 401-14-o IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.725 OF 2018IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.401 OF 2014 Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-14, Mumbai. … Applicant V/s. Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Ltd. … Respondent --- Mr.Arvind Pinto with Mr. N.C.Ranganayakulu for the Applicant.Mr.Nitesh Joshi i/by Mr.Sameer Dalal for the Respondent. --- CORAM : AKIL KURESHI AND M.S.SANKLECHA, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 15, 2019. P.C.:- 1.This notice of motion is taken out by the revenue seekingcondonation of delay of 1346 days caused in removing officeobjections. Ordinarily, we would have examined the nature ofexplanation for such long delay. However, in the present caselearned counsel for the parties jointly submitted that the centralissue raised by the revenue in the Income Tax Appeal is squarelycovered in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax-VI Vs. Priya Soparkar 2907 nma 725-18 in itxal 401-14-o Virtual soft Systems Ltd.[1] In that view of the matter, learnedcounsel for the the respondent-assessee did not object tocondonation of delay. The delay is therefore condoned whichmay not be seen as our approval of the reasons offered by therevenue seeking condonation. Order of the Prothonotarydismissing the appeal for non-removal of office objection is setaside. The appeal restored to file. Surviving office objectionsoverruled. Notice of motion is disposed of accordingly. (M.S.SANKLECHA,J.) (AKIL KURESHI,J.)….