Nma/8/2006 Of The Director Of Income-Tax-(Exemtion) v. National Health And Education Society
High Court
04 Feb 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/8/2006 Of The Director Of Income-Tax-(Exemtion) v. National Health And Education Society
Date of order
04 Feb 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Nma/8/2006 Of The Director Of Income-Tax-(Exemtion) v. National Health And Education Society, 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.8 OF 2006
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL(L)NO.1827 OF 2005
The Director of Income-Tax(Exemption) ..Appellant Mumbai
V/s.
National Health & Education Society..Respondent
Mr.R.G.Bhat with Mr.P.S.Sahadevan. Advocate, forAppellant Mr.Y.P.Trivedi, Senior Counsel with Usha Dalal,Advocate, for Respondent
DATE : 4TH FEBRUARY, 2008
P.C.
.This is a Notice of Motion for condoning adelay of 565 days in filing of the main appeal. Onperusal of the affidavit in support it is seen thatlast date for filing the main appeal was 11[th] June,2004 but the same was filed on 28[th] December, 2005.It is further seen that the file was sent to theLaw Ministry by Judicial for drafting an appealmemo on 6[th] May, 2004 and the draft was received on24[th] March, 2005. This delay of ten months cannot
be said to be reasonable. Since cause shown doesnot amount to sufficient cause and hence, Notice ofMotion 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.