Nma/3872/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 7, Mumbai v. Shri Kishorebhai K. Patel Mumbai
High Court
12 Dec 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/3872/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 7, Mumbai v. Shri Kishorebhai K. Patel Mumbai
Date of order
12 Dec 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Nma/3872/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 7, Mumbai v. Shri Kishorebhai K. Patel Mumbai, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORIGINAL SIDE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORIGINAL SIDE
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3872 OF 2008
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3872 OF 2008
IN
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) No. 2971 OF 2008.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) No. 2971 OF 2008.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) No. 2971 OF 2008.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes,Office :
Memoranda of Coram, : Court’s or Judge’s orders
appearances,Court ’s :
orders or directions & :
Prothonotary’s orders. :
------------------------------------------------------------
Mr Suresh Kumar, Advocate for the Appellant.
Mr A. K. Jasani, Advocate for the Respondent.
CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN
CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN
CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN
and V.C.DAGA, JJ.
and V.C.DAGA, JJ.
DATED : 12TH DECEMBER, 2008.
DATED : 12TH DECEMBER, 2008.
P.C.:
P.C.:
1. Heard the learned counsel for the
Parties.
2. Perused Notice of Motion and affidavit
in support thereof.
3. For the reasons stated in the Notice of
Motion and affidavit in support thereof
sufficient cause is made out for condoning
delay of 86 days in filing the above appeal.
There is no case of inaction, negligence or
want of bonafide on the part of the
appellant-applicant. Hence, the notice of
motion is made absolute in terms of prayer
clause (a).
(V.C. DAGA,J.) (DR.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(V.C. DAGA,J.) (DR.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(V.C. DAGA,J.) (DR.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,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.