Nma/446/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -12 Mumbai v. Ramesh G. Vora ( Huf )
High Court
17 Jun 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/446/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -12 Mumbai v. Ramesh G. Vora ( Huf )
Date of order
17 Jun 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Nma/446/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -12 Mumbai v. Ramesh G. Vora ( Huf ), 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 JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.446 of 2008inINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.197 of 2008ININCOME TAX APPEAL NO.OF 2008The Commissioner of Income Tax12.. Appellant
Mr.Ramesh G.Arora (HUF) ..Respondent
A.S.Rao for AppellantNone for Respondent
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. Noneappears for the respondent. By this notice ofmotion, the appellant is seeking condonation of352 days delay caused in filing the appeal.
2. The appellant is challenging the orderI.T.A.T. order dt. 20.9.06. The C.I.T. grantedapproval on 31.1.07. However, the appeal came tobe filed after a year i.e. on 28.1.08. The delaywas primarily due to getting the memo of appealdrafted and also in view of purely administrativeexigencies, the delay has occured. We are not atall satisfied with the reasons given forcondonation of delay. No sufficient cause is madeout for condonation of delay. Hence, Notice ofmotion stands dismissed.
3. In view of dismissal of the Notice of Motion,Income Tax Appeal (L) No.197 of 2008 also standsdismissed.
{A.V.Nirgude, 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.
EaseValue