The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Atv Project India Ltd
High Court
18 Sep 2007 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Atv Project India Ltd
Date of order
18 Sep 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Atv Project India Ltd, the High Court (2007) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
((-1-))
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3343 OF 2005
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 1415 OF 2005
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant
Versus
M/s. ATV Project India Ltd. ... Respondent
Mr. S.M.Shah for the Appellant.
CORAM: F.I.
CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED: SEPTEMBER 18, 2007
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED: SEPTEMBER 18, 2007
P.C.:
P.C.:
. There is delay of 378 days. There is affidavit
in support of the motion. The order was received by
Commissioner of Income Tax on 16.6.2004. The
Scrutiny report was called for on 22.10.2004. There
is no explanation whatsoever for this delay. The
draft appeal was received by the Ministry of Law on
1.2.2005. The only averment is that stamp papers
were not available till the end of September, 2005.
The appeal itself was filed on 26.10.2005. No
explanation for the said delay also. Considering
the cause shown, the same would not amount to
sufficient cause. Hence, motion dismissed.
((-2-))
(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
(F.I.REBELLO, 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.