The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Morarjee Goculdas Spg
High Court
15 Jan 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Morarjee Goculdas Spg
Date of order
15 Jan 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Morarjee Goculdas Spg, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
((-1-))
HVN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2594 OF 2006
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 1409 OF 2006
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant
Vs.
M/s. Morarjee Goculdas Spg. &
Wvg. Co. Ltd. ... Respondent
Mr. A.D. Kango for the Appellant.
Mr. A.K. Jasani for Respondent.
CORAM: F.I.
CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&R.S. MOHITE, JJ.DATED: JANUARY 15, 2008
R.S. MOHITE, JJ.
DATED: JANUARY 15, 2008
P.C.
P.C.
. There is delay of 407 days in preferring this
appeal. There is affidavit in support of the
motion. We find that the order was received in the
office of the CIT on 21.2.2005. The CIT VI
recommended filing of appeal on 2.9.2005. In
between some other steps have also been taken. The
file was sent to Ministry of Law on 19.9.2005 and
the same was returned by Ministry of Law on
15.12.2005. The draft was duly received on
13.2.2006 and the appeal was field on 1.8.2006. It
is sought to be explained that there were no stamp
papers. The appeal was field on 1.8.2006. The tax
incidence in the instant case is Rs. 42.45 crores.
((-2-))
There is no doubt that there is some delay on the
part of the Revenue which has not been properly
explained. However, considering the fact that the
appeal has been field and substantial period of the
appeal has been explained, in our opinion, this
would be a fit case to exercise our jurisdiction to
condone the delay. At the highest the respondents
can be compensated in terms of cost. In the light
of the above, the delay condoned subject to
appellant paying cost to the respondent quantified
at Rs.5,000/-. Delay condoned. Office to register
the appeal.
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(R.S. MOHITE, 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.