Case LawHigh Court › Nms/1272/1996 Of Director Of Income Tax...

Nms/1272/1996 Of Director Of Income Tax (Exemption) Bombay v. The Cricket Club Of Indiabrabourne Stadium

High Court 12 Dec 2005 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nms/1272/1996 Of Director Of Income Tax (Exemption) Bombay v. The Cricket Club Of Indiabrabourne Stadium
Date of order
12 Dec 2005
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Nms/1272/1996 Of Director Of Income Tax (Exemption) Bombay v. The Cricket Club Of Indiabrabourne Stadium, the High Court (2005) 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 ORDINARYORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1272 OF 1996IN INCOME TAX APPLICATION (LOD) NO.250 OF 1996 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1272 OF 1996 IN INCOME TAX APPLICATION (LOD) NO.250 OF 1996 The Director of Income Tax Exemption ..Applicant. V/s. The Cricket Club of India ..Respondent. Mr.A.S.Rao for applicant. Mr.Birendra Saraf i/b. M/s. Gagrat & Co. for respondent. CORAM : H.L.GOKHALE AND CORAM : H.L.GOKHALE AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED : 12TH DECEMBER, 2005. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 12TH DECEMBER, 2005. P.C. :- P.C. :- . Heard Mr.Rao in support of the application. Mr.Saraf appears for respondent. Mr.Rao seeks condonation of delay of 593 days in filing the application. The only explanation given is acute man power crisis. It is not possible to accept the said explanation for delay of 593 days in filing the application. The Notice of Motion is rejected. Consequently, the application also stands rejected. (H.L.GOKHALE, J.) (H.L.GOKHALE, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Get help with an income-tax notice → 💬 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