Nma/498/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-Ii,Mum v. M/S Crest Communication P.ltd
High Court
01 Oct 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/498/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-Ii,Mum v. M/S Crest Communication P.ltd
Date of order
01 Oct 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Nma/498/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-Ii,Mum v. M/S Crest Communication P.ltd, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.
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 BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.498 OF 2006ININCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.195 OF 2006
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.498 OF 2006
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.195 OF 2006
The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant.
V/s.
M/s.Crest Communication P. Ltd. ..Respondent.
Mr.A.D.Kango with P.S.Sahadevan for appellant.
CORAM : F.I.REBELLO ANDJ.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 1ST OCTOBER, 2007.
CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 1ST OCTOBER, 2007.
P.C. :-
P.C. :-
There is a delay of 302 days in preferring
the appeal. There is affidavit of Mr.K.Mohandas in
support of the Motion. There is an additional
affidavit of Mr.Manoj Kumar filed on 29/9/2007. The
delay between 8/4/2005 and 30/11/2005 has occasioned in
the Law Ministry over which the appellant had really no
control. The draft after receipt appears to have been
scrutinised by the assessing officer and certain
recommendations were made and the draft was collected
by the panel counsel in the second week of January,
2006 and appeal was filed on 7/2/2006. Considering the
cause shown, in our opinion, it would amount to
sufficient cause. Hence delay is condoned. Office to
register the appeal.
Motion disposed of.
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)(F.I.REBELL0, J.)
(F.I.REBELL0, 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.