The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Madhumilan Syntex Ltd
High Court
12 Sep 2007 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Madhumilan Syntex Ltd
Date of order
12 Sep 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Madhumilan Syntex 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.
((-1-))
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2929 OF 2005
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1204 OF 2005
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant
Versus
M/s. Madhumilan Syntex Ltd. ... Respondent
Mr. B.M. Chatterjee with Ms. P.P. Bhosale and Mr.
P.S. Sahadevan for the Appellants.
Mr. F.I. Irani with Mr. Atul K. Jasani for
Respondent.
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 386 days. Considering the time
taken by the Law Department, we have in several
cases condoning the delay. In the instant case, we
find that the file was received by the Law Department on 21.2.2005 and the appeal was filed on 30.9.2005. There is no explanation whatsoever for
the delay between receipt of the file and filing of
the appeal memo.
. The learned counsel for the respondents contend
that there is no sufficient cause for condonation of
delay. After having considered the affidavit, we
agree with the learned counsel for the respondents
((-2-))
that there is no sufficient explanation for the
delay. In the light of that cause shown would not
amount to sufficient cause. Hence, motion
dismissed.
(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.