This order dismisses five wealth tax appeal notices. The court rejected the plea for condonation of a 956-day delay due to lack of satisfactory explanation. The appeals were also dismissed as they were barred by a Supreme Court decision.
All five notice of motions and corresponding wealth tax applications dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1584 OF 1996
IN
WEALTH TAX APPLICATION (L) NO.287 OF 1996
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1585 OF 1996
IN
WEALTH TAX APPLICATION (L) NO.288 OF 1996
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1586 OF 1996
IN
WEALTH TAX APPLICATION (L) NO.289 OF 1996
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1587 OF 1996
IN
WEALTH TAX APPLICATION (L) NO.290 OF 1996
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1588 OF 1996
IN
WEALTH TAX APPLICATION (L) NO.291 OF 1996
The Commissioner of Income Tax .. Applicant.
V/s.
Haribai T. Dolwani .. Respondent.
Mr.A.S. Rao for the applicant in all the matters.
None for the respondent.
CORAM : H.L. GOKHALE &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 16TH DECEMBER, 2005.
P.C. :
1. Heard Mr.Rao in support of all these notice
of motions.
2. All these motions seeks condonation of delay
2
of 956 days in each matter in filing the application.
No satisfactory explanation is given for such a huge
delay.
3. That apart, the question which is sought to
be raised in all these applications is covered by the
decision of the Supreme Court in the case of
Smt.Kusumben D. Mahadevia reported in 122 ITR 38.
4. All motions therefore, stand dismissed. All
the applications will also consequently stands
dismissed.
(H.L. GOKHALE, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether condonation of delay for 956 days in filing wealth tax applications is permissible absent satisfactory explanation.
Whether the issues raised in the applications are barred by the decision in Smt.Kusumben D. Mahadevia.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Smt.Kusumben D. MahadeviaDistinguished¶18
122 ITR 38
Commissioner of Income Tax
Haribai T. Dolwani
H.L. Gokhale
J.P. Devadhar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court