Nma/103/2018 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-(E), Pune v. Maharashtra Academy Of Engineering And Educational Research
High Court
23 Feb 2018 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/103/2018 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-(E), Pune v. Maharashtra Academy Of Engineering And Educational Research
Date of order
23 Feb 2018
Assessment year(s)
2005-06
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Nma/103/2018 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-(E), Pune v. Maharashtra Academy Of Engineering And Educational Research, the High Court (2018) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: 4.Needless to state that if the office objections are not removed within four weeks from today, the appeals itself would stand dismissed without further reference to the Court.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 103 OF 2018IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 2992 OF 2017
WITHNOTICE OF MOTION NO. 107 OF 2018IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 2993 OF 2017
Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions)Pune
.. Applicant
In the matter betweenCommissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions)Punev/s. Maharashtra Academy of Engineering and Educational Research
.. Appellant
.. Respondent
Mr. Sham Walve for the applicant / orig. appellant Mr. Mandar Vaidya for the respondent
CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA & RIYAZ I. CHAGLA J.J.
DATED : 23[rd] FEBRUARY, 2018.
P.C.
1.
These two Notices of Motion seek condonation of 6 days delay in
filing the appeal against the common impugned order dated 16[th] May, 2017 passed by the Income tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) for Assessment Year 2005-06.
2.We have perused the affidavit dated 27[th] November, 2017 in support of the motion of Sudha Gupta, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and are satisfied with the reasons stated therein.
3.Accordingly, both the Notices of Motion are allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).
4.Needless to state that if the office objections are not removed within four weeks from today, the appeals itself would stand dismissed without further reference to the Court.
(RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, J.)
(M.S. SANKLECHA, 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.