The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S.lsr Speciality Oil Pvt.ltd
High Court
18 Dec 2007 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S.lsr Speciality Oil Pvt.ltd
Date of order
18 Dec 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.lsr Speciality Oil Pvt.ltd, the High Court (2007) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4128 OF 2007
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2198 OF 2006
The Commissioner of Income-tax- ) ..Appellant
Versus
M/s.LSR Speciality Oil Pvt.Ltd., )..Respondent
----
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for appellant.
Mr.K.Gopal for the respondent.
----
Coram : F.I.Rebello &
R.S.Mohite,JJ
Date : 18.12.2007.
PC
1. Heard Advocate for the appellant.
2. This Notice of Motion has been filed for
condonation of 135 days delay in filing the main
appeal. On perusal of the affidavit in support of
the Notice of motion, we find that the delay has
been sought to be explained. It is contended before
us that in December 2005, the processing of judicial
matters was shifted from the Law Ministry to the
Income Tax Department and this has resulted in
several administrative difficulties. In certain
cases all the papers have not been received. The
panel counsel were also involved in dealing with
older cases received from the Law Ministry. Taking
into account all these facts, we propose to accept
: 2 :
the cause shown for condonation of delay subject to
levy of costs. Notice of motion is therefore,
allowed and the delay in filing the appeal stands
condoned subject to payment of costs of Rs.2500/-
which is to be paid directly to the respondent
within a period of six weeks from today. It is made
clear that the department will be at liberty to
recover the costs from the officer responsible for
causing the delay.
(R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)
(R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,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.