The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panaji v. The Quepem Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd
High Court
27 Mar 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hcbgoa
Parties
The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panaji v. The Quepem Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd
Date of order
27 Mar 2019
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panaji v. The Quepem Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd, the High Court (2019) 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 BOMBAY AT GOA
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 108 OF 2019
IN
TAX APPEAL NO. 2 OF 2018
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANAJI.,
Versus
... Applicant
THE QUEPEM URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,
... Respondent
Ms. Susan Linhares, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Chaitanya K. K. and Mr. S. Redkar, Advocates for theRespondent.
-Coram:R. D. DHANUKA &
PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, JJ.-Date:27th March 2019
P.C.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. We have perused the averments made in the Misc. CivilApplication seeking the condonation of delay of 16 days in filingthe restoration application. We are satisfied that the delay of 16days in filing the restoration application is sufficiently explainedin the Misc. Civil Application.
3. For the reasons recorded in the Misc. Civil Application,the delay of 16 days in filing the restoration application is
condoned. No order as to costs.
4. Place the Tax Appeal No.2 of 2018 on board for admissionon 15th April, 2019.
PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.
at*
R. D. DHANUKA, 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