Case LawHigh Court › Rpg Cables Ltd v. The Additional Commiss...

Rpg Cables Ltd v. The Additional Commissioner Of

High Court 16 Jun 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Rpg Cables Ltd v. The Additional Commissioner Of
Date of order
16 Jun 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Rpg Cables Ltd v. The Additional Commissioner Of, the High Court (2008) 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 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.344 OF 2007 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.344 OF 2007 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.344 OF 2007 IN IN IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.176 OF 2007 RPG Cables Ltd. .. Appellant Vs. The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax .. Respondent Mr.Murlidharan with Mr.Rajesh Shah for the Appellant. None for the Respondent. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & A.V.NIRGUDE, JJ. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & A.V.NIRGUDE, JJ. DATE : 16th June, 2008 DATE : 16th June, 2008 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant. None appears for the Respondent though served. The learned Counsel for the Respondent undertakes to file an affidavit of service within a period of one week from today. 2. By this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is seeking condonation of 170 days’ delay caused in filing the Appeal. For the reasons stated in the affidavit-in-support of the Notice of Motion, sufficient cause is made out for condonation of delay, and there is no case of inaction, negligence or want of bonafide on the part of the Appellant. Hence, the Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). (A.V.NIRGUDE, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (A.V.NIRGUDE, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,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