Mumbai v. M/S. A.f. Ferguson & Co
High Court
27 Aug 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Mumbai v. M/S. A.f. Ferguson & Co
Date of order
27 Aug 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Mumbai v. M/S. A.f. Ferguson & Co, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
((-1-))
HVN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 774 OF 2005
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 277 OF 2005
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Mumbai. ... Appellant
Versus
M/s. A.F. Ferguson & Co. ... Respondent
Mr. A.N. Kotangale i/by Pankaj Kapoor for the
Appellant.
None for Respondents.
CORAM: F.I.
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED: AUGUST 27, 2007
P.C.:
. The respondent though served, none present for the Respondents. The averments in the affidavit in support of the motion have not been disputed. Considering what is set out therein and the delay in the ministry of law,in our opinion, the cause shown
Considering what is set out therein and the delay in the ministry of law,in our opinion, the cause shown amounts to sufficient cause.Hence, delay condoned.
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