The Cit- 14, Mumbai v. M/S.pattani Optical & Contact
High Court
08 Apr 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Cit- 14, Mumbai v. M/S.pattani Optical & Contact
Date of order
08 Apr 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Cit- 14, Mumbai v. M/S.pattani Optical & Contact, 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
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4165 OF 2007
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4165 OF 2007
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4165 OF 2007
IN
IN
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2415 OF 2007
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2415 OF 2007
The CIT- 14, Mumbai .. Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Pattani Optical & Contact
Lens Clinic .. Respondent
Mr.S.M.Shah for the Appellant.
Mr.Ajay Singh for the Respondent.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATE : 8th April, 2008
DATE : 8th April, 2008
DATE : 8th April, 2008
P.C.
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the
Appellant-revenue and the learned Counsel for the
Respondent-assessee. By this Notice of Motion, the
Appellant is seeking condonation of 217 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).
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,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.