Mumbai v. Saidarshan Investment Pvt. Ltd
High Court
04 Sep 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Mumbai v. Saidarshan Investment Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
04 Sep 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Mumbai v. Saidarshan Investment Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3362 of 2005
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.1396 OF 2005
The Commissioner of Income-tax
Mumbai ..Appellant
Vs.
Saidarshan Investment Pvt. Ltd..Respondent
Mr. A.D. Kango, for the Appellant.
CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ.DATED: 4TH SEPTEMEBR, 2007
CORAM: F.I.
J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ.
DATED: 4TH SEPTEMEBR, 2007
P.C.
. Learned Counsel produces evidence to show
that the respondents have been served. None present
for the respondents. The delay is of 271 days.
There is an affidavit in support of the Motion.
Considering the cause shown and as the averments
stand unrebutted in our opinion the cause shown amounts to sufficietn cause. Hence, delay condoned. Motion made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
Office to register the Appeal.
(J.P. DEVADHAR, 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