Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shree...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shree Nivas Niryat Udyog P. Ltd

High Court 31 Oct 2007 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shree Nivas Niryat Udyog P. Ltd
Date of order
31 Oct 2007
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shree Nivas Niryat Udyog P. 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.

The order — as passed by the High Court

((-1-)) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1811 OF 2006 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 833 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant Versus Shree Nivas Niryat Udyog P. Ltd.... Respondent Mr. A.S. Rao for the Appellant. None for Respondents. CORAM: F.I. J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED: OCTOBER 31, 2007 P.C. P.C. . An affidavit has been filed by one Ms. Benedicta Sequeira, Inspector setting out that the Respondents have been served. . There is delay of 245 days in preferring the appeal. Earlier in support of the Motion, an affidavit has been filed by Mr. P.O. Kapoor, and an additional affidavit came to be filed by one Mr. B.V. Save on 18.10.2007 wherein further particular have been set out. The reasons for the delay in preferring the appeal is also set out. The Respondent though served did not appear. Considering that the contents of the affidavit have ((-2-)) not been rebutted, in our opinion, the cause shown would amount to sufficient cause. Hence, motion allowed in terms of Prayer Clause (a). Office to register the appeal. (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan