Nma/3175/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 12 Mumbai v. Janak Rangwalla
High Court
13 Feb 2013 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/3175/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 12 Mumbai v. Janak Rangwalla
Date of order
13 Feb 2013
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Nma/3175/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 12 Mumbai v. Janak Rangwalla, the High Court (2013) 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
sas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3175 OF 2009INREVIEW PETITION (LOD) NO.53 OF 2009IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2287 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax-12, Mumbai
..Appellant.
V/s.
Janak S. Rangwalla
..Respondent.
Mr. Suresh Kumar for the appellant.
Mr. B.V. Jhaveri for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ.DATED : 13TH FEBRUARY, 2013
P.C. :-
1.By this Notice of Motion, the appellant seeks condonation of 241 days delay in filing the Review Petition.
2.The Review Petition itself seeks review of the order dated
dated 25[th] September, 2008 passed by this Court, dismissing the appeal on the grounds of delay. The basis of the Review Petition is
that subsequently, by an order dated 7[th] January, 2009 this Court in another matter has condoned the delay of 434 days delay in filing the appeal. The Review is sought of the impugned order dated 25[th ]September, 2008 on the basis of the subsequent order passed on 7[th ]January, 2009. A later order dated 7[th] January, 2009 cannot be the basis for review of an order passed earlier on 25[th] September, 2008.
3.In view of the above, we see no reason to entertain the Notice of Motion. Hence Notice of Motion is dismissed with no order as to costs. Consequently, the Review Petition is consigned to record.
(M.S. SANKLECHA, 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.