Mumbai City 11, Mumbai v. Mr. Jatin Rajguru
High Court
11 Dec 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Mumbai City 11, Mumbai v. Mr. Jatin Rajguru
Date of order
11 Dec 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Mumbai City 11, Mumbai v. Mr. Jatin Rajguru, the High Court (2007) dismissed the appeal.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Notice of Motion No.4487 of 2007 in
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
Notice of Motion No.4487 of 2007
in
Income Tax Appeal No.2479 of 2007.
Income Tax Appeal No.2479 of 2007.
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Mumbai City 11, Mumbai ..Appellant
versus
Mr. Jatin Rajguru ..Respondent.
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant
Coram : F.I.Rebello &
Coram : F.I.Rebello &
Coram : F.I.Rebello &
R.S.Mohite, JJ.
R.S.Mohite, JJ.
Dated : 11th Dec., 2007
Dated : 11th Dec., 2007
Dated : 11th Dec., 2007
P.C.
. There is delay of 1583 days. Order was
received on 18.2.2003. The Commissioner of Income
Tax grant approval to file appeal on 14/7/2003. The
appeal is filed on 19.10.2007. There is no
explanation for the delay, subsequent to approval
being granted for filing of the appeal. In our
opinion, the cause shown will not amount to
sufficient cause. Even though the tax effect is
substantial, in our opinion this would not be the
fit case in absence of sufficient cause to condone
the delay of 1583 days. Hence motion is dismissed.
(F.I.Rebello, J.)
(F.I.Rebello, J.)
(F.I.Rebello, J.)
(R.S.Mohite, J.)
(R.S.Mohite, J.)
-2-
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.