The Director Of Income Tax v. M/S.van Oord Dredging & Marine
High Court
15 Apr 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Director Of Income Tax v. M/S.van Oord Dredging & Marine
Date of order
15 Apr 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Director Of Income Tax v. M/S.van Oord Dredging & Marine, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
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.570 OF 2008
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.570 OF 2008
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.570 OF 2008
IN
IN
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2801 OF 2007
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2801 OF 2007
The Director of Income Tax .. Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Van Oord Dredging & Marine
Contractors BV .. Respondent
Mr.S.M.Shah for the Appellant.
Mr.A.K.Jasani for the Respondent.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATE : 15th April, 2008
DATE : 15th April, 2008
P.C.
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. By
this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is seeking
condonation of 257 days’ delay caused in filing the
Appeal. Perused the affidavit-in-support of the Notice
of Motion. It appears that the DGIT (IT) had granted
approval for filing the Appeal on 19.03.2007, however
the Appeal came to be filed belatedly on 05.12.2007. We
are not satisfied with the reasons given for condonation
of delay. The reasons given for delay that of getting
the draft memo of Appeal prepared and non-availability
of Court fee stamps etc. does not appear to be
justifiable. No sufficient cause is made out for
condonation of delay. Hence, Notice of Motion stands
dismissed.
2. In view of dismissal of the Notice of Motion, Income
Tax Appeal (L) No.2801/2007 also stands dismissed.
(J.P.DEVADHAR, 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