Nma/3267/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -18, Mumbai v. N.m.fashions
High Court
14 Feb 2011 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/3267/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -18, Mumbai v. N.m.fashions
Date of order
14 Feb 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Nma/3267/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -18, Mumbai v. N.m.fashions, the High Court (2011) decided the matter.
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 JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3267 OF 2010
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.652 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax-18, MumbaiV/s.M/s. N.M.Fashions
..... Appellant
..... Respondents
----
Mr.K.R.Chaudhari for the appellant.
Mr.Jitendra Jain @ Mr.Jas Sanghvi i/by PDS Legal for the respondents.
----
CORAM : J.P.DEVADHAR &
MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.
DATE :14/2/ 2011
P.C.
1.This Notice of Motion is taken out for condoning 598 days delay in filing the Appeal. The reasons set out in the affidavit and the additional affidavit are totally unsatisfactory. The sequence of events leading to the inordinate delay set out in paragraph-9 of the additional affidavit dated 15.11.2010 clearly shows that there was total negligence on the part of the officers of the department in filing the appeal. However, looking to the fact that huge revenue is involved, in our opinion, it would be just and
proper to condone the delay subject to payment of costs. Accordingly, Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses-(a) and (b) subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid to the respondents within a period of two weeks from today. Notice of Motion disposed off.
(MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,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.