The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Megha Property & Developers
High Court
14 Aug 2007 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Megha Property & Developers
Date of order
14 Aug 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Megha Property & Developers, the High Court (2007) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: Office to register the appeal subject to checking whether court fees are properly paid.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2002 OF 2005
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) 782 IF 2005
The Commissioner of Income Tax .... Appellant
Vs.
M/s Megha Property & Developers .... Respondent
Mrs. P.P. Bhosale & Mr.B.M. Chatterji for
Appellant.
Mr. Balkrishna Javeri for Respondent.
CORAM : F.I. REBELLO, &
. J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ
DATE : 14TH AUGUST, 2007
P.C.
. The delay is of 114 days and we have
considered the affidavit in support of the motion.
Considering the delay in the Law Department, in our
opinion, the cause shown would amount to sufficient
cause. In the light of that, motion made absolute
in terms of Prayer Clause (a). Office to register
the appeal subject to checking whether court fees
are properly paid. If any deficiency is found in
the court fees, Department is allowed to pay the
same.
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.