Nma/3928/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-13, Mumbai v. M/S. Jafferbhoy And Salebhoy And Co
High Court
04 Feb 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/3928/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-13, Mumbai v. M/S. Jafferbhoy And Salebhoy And Co
Date of order
04 Feb 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Nma/3928/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-13, Mumbai v. M/S. Jafferbhoy And Salebhoy And Co, the High Court (2008) 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3928 OF 2006
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL(L)NO.2357 OF 2006
The Commissioner of Income Tax-13,..Appellant Mumbai
V/s.
M/s.Jafferbhoy & Salebhoy & Co...RespondentMumbai
Mr.A.S.Rao, Advocate, for AppellantNone for Respondent
CORAM : F.I.REBELLO &R.S.MOHITE,JJ.
DATE : 4TH FEBRUARY, 2008
P.C.
.This is a Notice of Motion for condoning adelay of 223 days in filing of the main appeal.Perusal of the affidavit in support indicates thatthe impugned order dated 21[st] October, 2005 and thesame was received by Assessing Officer only on 19[th]December, 2005. However, the file was sent fordrafting to the Panel Counsel on 23[rd] March, 2006.
There is no explanation for the delay caused during
the period 19[th] December, 2005 and 23[rd] March, 2006.
In our view, therefore, the cause shown does not
amount to sufficient cause and hence, the Notice ofMotion stands dismissed.Motion stands dismissed.
(R.S.MOHITE, J.)
(F.I.REBELLO, 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.