Nma/412/2018 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 v. Honeywell Turbo Technologies(India) Pvt.ltd
High Court
08 Jun 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/412/2018 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 v. Honeywell Turbo Technologies(India) Pvt.ltd
Date of order
08 Jun 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Nma/412/2018 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 v. Honeywell Turbo Technologies(India) Pvt.ltd, the High Court (2018) 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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 412 OF 2018IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 1948 OF 2017
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1Pune.. Applicant
In the matter betweenPr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1Pune.. Appellant
v/s.
Honeywell Turbo Technologies (India) Pvt. Ltd. ..RespondentPune
Mr. Tejinder Singh for the applicant / orig. appellantMs. Jasmin Amalsadvala i/b PDS Legal for the respondent
CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA &
SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.J.
DATED : 8[th] JUNE, 2018.
P.C.
1.This application has been taken out to set aside the order dated 9[th] November, 2017 passed by the Prothonotary and Senior Master by self operating order. The appeal stood dismissed for non-prosecution of office objections on or before 7[th] December, 2017 under Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules.
2.The affidavit-in-support of the Notice of Motion points out that
412-18-NMA-24=.doc
the advocate's clerk had removed the office objections on 20[th ]November, 2017 but due to oversight, he forgot to take extension of time to remove the further objections.
3.Mr. A.K. Jha, the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax in the affidavit-in-support points out that he became aware of the dismissal of the appeal for non-removal of office objections on second week of March, 2018 and immediately thereafter he took steps to take out the present notice of motion.
4.We are satisifed with the reasons indicated in the affidavit-in-support and allow the motion in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b).
(SANDEEP K. SHINDE J.)
(M.S. SANKLECHA, 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.