The Cit v. M/S.omprakash & Co
High Court
14 Jan 2008 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Cit v. M/S.omprakash & Co
Date of order
14 Jan 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Cit v. M/S.omprakash & Co, the High Court (2008) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
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.2515 OF 2006
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG.) NO.1105 OF 2006
The CIT ..Appellant
Versus
M/s.Omprakash & Co. ..Respondent
----
Mr.B.M.Chatterji & Mrs.P.P.Bhosale with
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for appellant.
Mr.A.K.Jasani for respondent.
----
Coram : F.I.REBELLO &
R.S.MOHITE,JJ
Date : 14.01.2008.
PC
1. Heard Advocates for the parties.
2. This is a Motion for condonation of 212 days
delay in filing of the main appeal. On perusal of
the affidavit in support of the Notice of Motion, in
our view, sufficient cause has been shown. No
affidavit in reply has been filed. Hence, we accept
the cause shown as sufficient cause and condone the
delay subject to payment of Rs.2500/- as cost to the
respondent. Cost to be paid to the respondent
within a period of four weeks from today. Notice of
Motion allowed accordingly.
(R.S.MOHITE,J) (F.I.REBELLO,J)
(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.
EaseValue