Nma/1810/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-12 v. Urmila Construction Company
High Court
15 Jan 2008 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/1810/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-12 v. Urmila Construction Company
Date of order
15 Jan 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Nma/1810/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-12 v. Urmila Construction Company, the High Court (2008) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
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.1810 OF 2006ININCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.978 OF 2006The Commissioner of Income tax...Appellant.Vs.Urmila Construction Company...Respondent.Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant.Mr.S.G.Dalal for the Respondent.CORAM : F.I. REBELLO &R.S. MOHITE, JJ.DATED : 15TH JANUARY,2008.PC :1. This is a notice of motion for condonation of 150days delay in preferring the main appeal. We haveperused the affidavit in support. Taking into accountthe facts stated in the affidavit in support, we proposeto accept the cause shown for condonation of delaysubject to leavy of costs. Notice of motion istherefore, allowed and the delay in filing the appealstands condoned subject to payment of costs of Rs.2500/-which is to be paid directly to the respondent within a
period of four weeks from today. Office to number the
appeal and list the same for admission.
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)
(F.I. REBELLO, J.)
period of four weeks from today. Office to number the
appeal and list the same for admission.
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)
(F.I. REBELLO, 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