Nma/266/2002 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bombay,City- Viii v. Photophone Ltd
High Court
03 Oct 2006 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/266/2002 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bombay,City- Viii v. Photophone Ltd
Date of order
03 Oct 2006
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Nma/266/2002 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bombay,City- Viii v. Photophone Ltd, the High Court (2006) 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 BOMBAY ORDINARYORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.266 OF 2002
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.266 OF 2002
ININCOME TAX APPLICATION (LODG.) NO.5 OF 2002
IN
INCOME TAX APPLICATION (LODG.) NO.5 OF 2002
The Commissioner of Income-tax ..Applicant.
V/s.
Photophne Limited ..Respondent.
Mr.S.M.Shah for applicant.
None for respondent.
CORAM : H.L.GOKHALE AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED : 3RD OCTOBER, 2006.
CORAM : H.L.GOKHALE AND
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 3RD OCTOBER, 2006.
P.C. :-
P.C. :-
Heard M.Shah in support the Motion. The
Motion seeks condonation of delay of 36 days in filing
the application. The Motion has been served on the
respondent. The affidavit of service has been filed.
None is present for the respondent. We accept the
explanation given in the supporting affidavit.
In the circumstances, the Motion is allowed.
Delay condoned. Application be numbered and listed for
admission on 16th October, 2006.
Respondent to be served once again.
(H.L.GOKHALE, J.)
(H.L.GOKHALE, J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, 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.