The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. L.k.p. Shares & Securities Ltd
High Court
12 Sep 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. L.k.p. Shares & Securities Ltd
Date of order
12 Sep 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. L.k.p. Shares & Securities Ltd, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.
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. 3213 OF 2005
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 1382 OF 2005
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant
Versus
M/s. L.K.P. Shares & Securities Ltd. Respondent
Mr. B.M. Chatterjee with Ms. P.P. Bhosale and Mr.
P.S. Sahadevan for the Appellants.
Mr. Sameer G. Dalal for Respondents.
CORAM: F.I.
CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED: SEPTEMBER 12, 2007
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED: SEPTEMBER 12, 2007
P.C.:
P.C.:
. There is delay of 370 days. There is affidavit
in support of the motion. The file was sent to
Ministry of Law on 11.10.2004 and the draft was
received from the Law Department on 17.10.2005. The
appeal was filed on 21.10.2005. Considering the
delay occasioned in the Law Department, in our
opinion, the cause shown would amount sufficient
cause. There is also no reply contesting the
averments. Considering the above, in our opinion,
the cause shown would amount to sufficient cause.
Hence, delay condoned. Office to register the
appeal.
(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, 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.