Nma/2077/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-19 Mumbai v. Shri Abraham Koshy Mumbai
High Court
16 Oct 2007 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/2077/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-19 Mumbai v. Shri Abraham Koshy Mumbai
Date of order
16 Oct 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Nma/2077/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-19 Mumbai v. Shri Abraham Koshy Mumbai, the High Court (2007) 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 BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2077 OF 2006IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.923 OF 2006
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2077 OF 2006
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.923 OF 2006
The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant.
V/s.
Shri Abraham Koshy ..Respondent.
Mr.R.Ashokan for appellant.
Mr.K.P.Anilkumar for respondent.
CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 16TH OCTOBER, 2007.
P.C. :-
P.C. :-
There is a delay of 385 days in preferring
the appeal. Mr.A.M.Inamdar filed an affidavit in
support. The I.T.A.T. order was received on 7/1/2005.
The file was sent to the Ministry of Law on 4/4/2005.
The Ministry of Law sent back the file after drafting
the appeal memo on 11/7/2005. The stamp papers were
applied for on 12/7/2005 and received on 2/12/2005.
Thereafter, appeal memo was sent for redrafting on
13/1/2006. The appeal was filed on 26/5/2006.
2. Once the appeal was drafted we find
absolutely no reason for the delay between 13/1/2006 to 26/5/2006. Considering the same, in our opinion, the
cause shown would not amount to sufficient cause.
Hence Motion is dismissed.
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)(F.I.REBELL0, J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, 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.