The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.radeus Advertising Pvt.ltd
High Court
03 Apr 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.radeus Advertising Pvt.ltd
Date of order
03 Apr 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.radeus Advertising Pvt.ltd, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1637 OF 2003ININCOME TAX APPEAL (L)NO.555 OF 2003
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Vs.
M/s.Radeus Advertising Pvt.Ltd.
..Applicant
..Respondent
Mr.Vimal Gupta for the Applicant.Ms.Pallavi Divekar for the Respondent.
P.C.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &V.C.DAGA, JJ.DATE : 3RD APRIL, 2007
1.Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Bythis Notice of Motion the Applicant is seekingcondonation of 36 days delay in filing the aboveAppeal. Perused the Notice of Motion and theaffidavit-in-support thereof. For the reasons statedtherein sufficient cause is made out for condoning thedelay in filing the above Appeal. There is no case ofinaction, negligence or want of bonafide on the part
of the Applicant. Hence, the Notice of Motion is made
absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
(V.C.DAGA,J.)
(V.C.DAGA,J.)
(V.C.DAGA,J.)
(DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,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.
EaseValue