The Commissioner Ofincome Tax 7, Mumbai v. A. P. Bhangale, Jj
High Court
04 Jun 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Ofincome Tax 7, Mumbai v. A. P. Bhangale, Jj
Date of order
04 Jun 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In The Commissioner Ofincome Tax 7, Mumbai v. A. P. Bhangale, Jj, the High Court (2008) 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 BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION No. 1443 OF 2008IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) No. 911 OF 2008
The Commissioner ofIncome Tax 7, Mumbai
Appellant
Vs.
M/s. Parimal Polymers,Ltd.Respondent
Mr. P. S. Sahadevan, for the Appellant.
Mr. A. K. Jasani, for the Respondent.
CORAM : Dr. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, AND
A. P. BHANGALE, JJ.
DATE : JUNE 4, 2008.
PC :-
.Heard the learned counsel for the applicantand the respondent. By this Notice of Motion,appellant is seeking condonation of delay 12 days infiling the appeal. Perused the Notice of Motion andthe affidavit in support thereof. For the reasonsstated therein sufficient cause is made out. Thereis no case of inaction, negligence or want of bonafides on the part of the appellant. Hence, the
Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer
clause (a).
Sd/-
[ Dr. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ]
Sd/-
[ A. P.BHANGALE, 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