The Commissioner Of Income Tax,-7 v. M/S.searle (I) Ltd
High Court
05 Apr 2010 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax,-7 v. M/S.searle (I) Ltd
Date of order
05 Apr 2010
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax,-7 v. M/S.searle (I) Ltd, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In the event of costs being paid, time for removal of office objections shall stand extended by a further period of four weeks from today, failing which the appeal shall stand dismissed for want of prosecution without reference to the Court.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO. O. C. J.
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3979 OF 2009ININCOME TAX APPEAL NO.197 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax,-7. Vs.M/s.Searle (I) Ltd.
...Appellant.
...Respondent.
....
Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Appellant.Mr. B.V.Jhaveri for the Respondent.
.....
CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
April 5, 2010.
P.C. :
The Motion has been taken out for restoration of an appeal which has been dismissed for non-compliance with the conditional order dated 18[th] June 2009 for non-removal of office objections. We have perused the affidavit in support and are of the view that while interests of justice will require that the appeal should be restored to file, this should be subject to payment of costs to the Respondent which shall be a condition precedent. The Notice of Motion is accordingly made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) subject to the payment of costs quantified at Rs.1500/-
which shall be paid within a period of two weeks from today. In
the event of costs being paid, time for removal of office objections shall stand extended by a further period of four weeks from today, failing which the appeal shall stand dismissed for want of prosecution without reference to the Court. The motion is accordingly disposed of.
( Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud, J.)
( J.P.Devadhar, 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.