Mumbai v. Mr.a.kotangale I/B. Pankaj Kapoor For The
High Court
17 Jul 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Mumbai v. Mr.a.kotangale I/B. Pankaj Kapoor For The
Date of order
17 Jul 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Mumbai v. Mr.a.kotangale I/B. Pankaj Kapoor For The, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
(-1-)
MGN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2585 OF 2004
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.1052 OF 2004
The Commissioner of Income-tax-3
Mumbai .....................Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Revlon Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd.Respondent
Mr.A.Kotangale i/b. Pankaj Kapoor for the
Appellant.
Mr. J.D. Mistry i/b. Raj Darak, for respondent
CORAM: F.I.
J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ.
P.C.:
P.C.:
. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. There is
a delay of 48 days. Considering the affidavit in
support of the Motion in our opinion the same
amounts to sufficient cause. In the light of that
Motion made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
Office to register the Appeal.
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, 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