Case LawHigh Court › Nma/712/2006 Of The Director Of Income-T...

Nma/712/2006 Of The Director Of Income-Tax(International Taxation) v. The Sakura Bank Ltd

High Court 17 Sep 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/712/2006 Of The Director Of Income-Tax(International Taxation) v. The Sakura Bank Ltd
Date of order
17 Sep 2007
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Nma/712/2006 Of The Director Of Income-Tax(International Taxation) v. The Sakura Bank Ltd, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.712 OF 2006ININCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.32 OF 2006 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.712 OF 2006 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.32 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. The Sakura Bank Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.A.S. Rao for appellant. CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND CORAM : F.I.REBELLO ANDJ.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 17TH SEPTEMBER, 2007. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 17TH SEPTEMBER, 2007. P.C. :- P.C. :- The respondents have been served. None present. There is a delay of 274 days in filing the appeal. There is affidavit in support of motion. It appears that the delay between 21/12/2004 to 9/11/2005 was occasioned in the Law Ministry. Thereafter, the department took time to get the necessary Court fees stamp and that took some time. Considering the above, in our opinion, the cause shown would amount to sufficient cause. Delay is condoned. Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Office to register the appeal. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I.REBELL0, 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