Nma/1709/2016 Of Brihanmumbai Kreeda Ani Lalit Kala Pratisthan v. Income Tax Officer(Exemption) And Anr
High Court
17 Jun 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/1709/2016 Of Brihanmumbai Kreeda Ani Lalit Kala Pratisthan v. Income Tax Officer(Exemption) And Anr
Date of order
17 Jun 2016
Assessment year(s)
2009-2010
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Nma/1709/2016 Of Brihanmumbai Kreeda Ani Lalit Kala Pratisthan v. Income Tax Officer(Exemption) And Anr, the High Court (2016) allowed 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONNOICE OF MOTION(L) NO.1594 OF 2016
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L)NO. 486 OF 2016
Brihanmumbai Kreeda Ani Lalit Kala PratisthanIn the matter betweenBrihanmumbai Kreeda Ani Lalit Kala Pratisthan
..Applicant
..Appellant
VersusIncome Tax Officer (Exemption) & anr,
..Respondents
...........
Mr. Jitendra Singh for the Applicant.None for the Respondents.
...........
CORAM: M. S. SANKLECHA & A. K. MENON, JJ.
P.C.:
DATE : 17TH JUNE, 2016
1.Mr. Singh, the learned counsel appearing in support of the application states that the Revenue has been served. Mr. Singh undertakes to file an affidavit of service within a period of one week from today. This Notice of Motion seeks condonation of 22 days delay in filing the appeal from the order of the Tribunal dated 20[th] November, 2015 relating to A.Y. 2009-2010.
2.On perusal of the affidavit, we find that sufficient cause has been made out for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the Notice of Motion is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).
(A. K. MENON, 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.
EaseValue