Nma/1576/2017 Of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-8 v. M/S. Rediffusion Dentsu Young And Rubicam Pvt. Ltd
High Court
29 Nov 2017 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/1576/2017 Of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-8 v. M/S. Rediffusion Dentsu Young And Rubicam Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
29 Nov 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Nma/1576/2017 Of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-8 v. M/S. Rediffusion Dentsu Young And Rubicam Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2017) 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
SKN
1/1 1576.17-nma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1576 OF 2017
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LDG.) NO. 681 OF 2017
The Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-8.…Applicant.V/s.Rediffusion Dentsu Young and Rubicam P.Ltd.…Respondent.
Ms.Priyanka Tiwari i/b. Mr.Suresh Kumar for the applicant.
CORAM :A.S.OKA AND A.K.MENON, JJ.DATE :29[th] November 2017.
P.C.:
The learned counsel appearing for the applicant states that notice of motion has been served on the respondent. We accept the statement. Affidavit of service to be filed within two weeks.2.In view of the averments made in the affidavit in support of the notice of motion, sufficient cause is made out to condone delay of 10 days. Hence, notice of motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
(A.K.MENON, J.)
(A.S.OKA, 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