Nma/2118/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 12, Mumbai v. Swaran Malik
High Court
22 Oct 2007 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/2118/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 12, Mumbai v. Swaran Malik
Date of order
22 Oct 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Nma/2118/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 12, Mumbai v. Swaran Malik, 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 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2118 OF 2006
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2118 OF 2006
IN
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.1082 OF 2006
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.1082 OF 2006
The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant.
V/s.
Mrs.Swaran Malik ..Respondent.
Mr.A.S.Rao with P.S.Sahadevan for appellant.
Mr.S.G.Dalal for respondent.
CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 22ND OCTOBER, 2007.
P.C. :-
P.C. :-
There is a delay of 534 days in preferring
the appeal. There is affidavit in support of the
Motion. The order of the I.T.A.T. dated 8/7/2004 was
received by the CIT-12 on 14/9/2004. After various
procedures, the Chief CIT granted approval on 5/1/2005.
The last date of filing the appeal was 11/1/2005. The
file was sent to the Ministry of Law on 6/1/2005. The
draft appeal memo was received on 2/6/2006. The appeal
was filed on 28/6/2006. There is absolutely no
explanation whatsoever for the delay between 6/1/2005
and 2/6/2006. Considering the cause shown, in our
opinion, the same would not amount to sufficient cause.
Hence Motion is dismissed.
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)(F.I.REBELL0, 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.