Case LawHigh Court › Nma/391/2016 Of G.das Capital Markets P....

Nma/391/2016 Of G.das Capital Markets P.ltd v. The Assistant Commissionerof Income Tax Ward-4(1)

High Court 01 Apr 2016 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/391/2016 Of G.das Capital Markets P.ltd v. The Assistant Commissionerof Income Tax Ward-4(1)
Date of order
01 Apr 2016
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Nma/391/2016 Of G.das Capital Markets P.ltd v. The Assistant Commissionerof Income Tax Ward-4(1), the High Court (2016) decided the matter.

Decision: 3.We are satisfied with the aforesaid reasons and consequently allow the Notice of Motion in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b).

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. 391 OF 2016 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 94 OF 2015 G. Das Capital Markets P. Ltd. .. Applicant In the matter between G. Das Capital Markets P. Ltd. .. Appellant v/s. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-TaxWard 4(1), Mumbai .. Respondent Mr. Nishit Gandhi i/b Vipul Joshi for the applicant Mr. A.R. Malhotra a/w N.A. Kazi for the respondent CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA & A.K. MENON, J.J. DATED : 1[st] APRIL, 2016. P.C. 1.This notice of motion has been taken out by the applicants for setting aside the order dated 7[th] May, 2015 rejecting the petitioner's appeal for non-removal of office objection under Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules. 2.On perusal of the affidavit, we find that the office objections raised by the Registry were removed by the applicant, save and except, informing the Prothonotary and Senior Master about the order passed on the Notice of Motion for condonation of delay taken out by the applicant. This Court had on 7[th] August, 2015 had condoned the delay of 27 days in filing the appeal from the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. It was on account of misunderstanding on the part of the applicant that as the Court had passed this order, it need not separately inform the Registry about the order dated 7[th] August, 2015. 3.We are satisfied with the aforesaid reasons and consequently allow the Notice of Motion in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). (A.K. MENON, J.) (M.S. SANKLECHA, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan