Case LawHigh Court › Nma/1515/2004 Of Sangammer Bhag Sahakari...

Nma/1515/2004 Of Sangammer Bhag Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Spl. Range-3 Nashik And Anr

High Court 03 Jul 2004 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/1515/2004 Of Sangammer Bhag Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Spl. Range-3 Nashik And Anr
Date of order
03 Jul 2004
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Nma/1515/2004 Of Sangammer Bhag Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Spl. Range-3 Nashik And Anr, the High Court (2004) decided the matter.

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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1515 OF 2004ININCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.550 OF 2004 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1515 OF 2004 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.550 OF 2004 Sangamner Bhag Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. ..Appellant. V/s. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. ..Respondents. Mr.Bhushan V.Mahdik for appellant. Mr.Ashok Kotangale for respondents. CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND CORAM : F.I.REBELLO ANDR.V.MORE, JJ. DATED : 3RD JULY, 2007. R.V.MORE, JJ. DATED : 3RD JULY, 2007. P.C. :- P.C. :- . This Notice of Motion is similar to what was stated in Notice Of Motion No.1511 of 2004. For the reasons set out therein, the cause shown would amount to sufficient cause and consequently, delay is condoned. Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Office to register the appeal. (F.I.REBELL0, J.) (F.I.REBELL0, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan