Nma/1506/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-12,Mum v. Ms Rashmi A. Ramsinghani
High Court
17 Jun 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/1506/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-12,Mum v. Ms Rashmi A. Ramsinghani
Date of order
17 Jun 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Nma/1506/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-12,Mum v. Ms Rashmi A. Ramsinghani, the High Court (2008) 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 BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.1506 of 2008inINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1075 of 2008ININCOME TAX APPEAL NO.OF 2008The Commissioner of Income Tax12 Mumbai.. Appellant
Ms.Rashmi Ramsinghani..Respondent
Mr.A.S.Rao for AppellantMr.A.K.Jasani for Respondent
P.C.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Bythis notice of motion, the appellant is seekingcondonation of 632 days delay caused in filing theappeal.
2. The appeal is against the order ofI.T.A.T.dt.30.1.06. The C.C.I.T. gave itsapproval for filing the appeal on 11.7.06.However, it took almost 19 months to draft thememo of appeal and another 15 months to obtaincourt fee stamps. The appeal came to be lodged on9.4.08. We are not at all satisfied with thereasons given for condonation of delay. Nosufficient cause is made out for condonation ofdelay. Hence, Notice of motion stands dismissed.
3. In view of dismissal of the Notice of Motion,Income Tax Appeal (L) No.1075 of 2008 also standsdismissed.
{A.V.Nirgude, J)(Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, 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