The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,City-Xiv, Mumbai v. M/S.hasmukh & Co. (P.g
High Court
24 Jul 2006 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,City-Xiv, Mumbai v. M/S.hasmukh & Co. (P.g
Date of order
24 Jul 2006
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,City-Xiv, Mumbai v. M/S.hasmukh & Co. (P.g, the High Court (2006) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO.O.C.J.
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.985 OF 2003IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODGING) NO.253 OF 2003
The Commissioner of Income-tax,City-XIV, Mumbai.
vs.
M/s.Hasmukh & Co. (P.G.)
Appellant
Respondent
Mr.Ashok Kotangale for the appellant.
Mr.Ajay Singh with M/s.K. Gopal & Pramod Kumar Paridafor the respondent.
CORAM: H.L.GOKHALE &V.R.KINGAONKAR,JJ.
DATED: 24th July, 2006
P.C.
Heard Mr.Kotangale, learned counsel in support ofthe motion and Mr.Ajay Singh, learned counsel for the
respondents.
2. The motion seeks condonation of delay of 16 days infiling the appeal. The explanation has been given inthe supporting affidavit as to why the appeal could notbe filed in time. The ground especially is that there-structuring of the department was going on and that
took time. Mr.Singh appearing for the respondent leaves
it to the court to pass appropriate order.
3. In the circumstances, we grant the motion in terms
of prayer clause (a). The delay is condoned. TheAppeal be numbered and listed for admission on 14th
August, 2006.
( H.L. GOKHALE, J.)
( V. R. KINGAONKAR,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