Nma/1172/2006 Of The Commssioner Of Income Tax City-I, Mumbai v. M/S. Mafatlal Dyes And Chem Ltd
High Court
01 Oct 2007 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/1172/2006 Of The Commssioner Of Income Tax City-I, Mumbai v. M/S. Mafatlal Dyes And Chem Ltd
Date of order
01 Oct 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Nma/1172/2006 Of The Commssioner Of Income Tax City-I, Mumbai v. M/S. Mafatlal Dyes And Chem Ltd, the High Court (2007) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
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 BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1172 OF 2006ININCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.401 OF 2006
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1172 OF 2006
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.401 OF 2006
The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant.
V/s.
M/s.Mafatlal Dyes & Chemicals Ltd. ..Respondent.
Mr.A.S. Rao for appellant.
CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 1ST OCTOBER, 2007.
P.C. :-
P.C. :-
There is a delay of 566 days in preferring
the appeal. There is an affidavit in support of the
Motion. The I.T.A.T. order was received on
27/04/2004. The C.I.T. approval was received on
20/8/2004. The file was sent to Ministry of Law and
thereafter, appeal was filed on 14/3/3006. There is is
no explanation whatsoever for the delay between 23/8/2004 and 14/3/2006. Considering the cause shown, in our opinion, the same would not amount to sufficient
cause. Hence Motion is dismissed.
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)(F.I.REBELL0, 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.