The court condensed a 120-day delay in filing an Income Tax Appeal by accepting the explanation provided in a further affidavit filed by the respondent.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARYORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1190 OF 2003
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG.) NO.298 OF 2003
The Commissioner of Income-tax ..Applicant.
V/s.
Late Shri P.R. Kamani
L/h. D.P.Kamani ..Respondent.
Mr.A.N.Kotangale for applicant.
Mr.V.B.Joshi with S.G.Dalal for respondent.
CORAM : H.L.GOKHALE AND
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 3RD OCTOBER, 2006.
P.C. :-
Heard Mr.Kotangale in support the Motion.
The Motion seeks condonation of delay of 120 days in
filing the appeal. Mr.Joshi appears for the
respondent. The delay is sought to be explained by a
further affidavit wherein particulars are given as to
how the delay was caused. Mr.Joshi has opposed the
condonation of delay. Yet we accept the explanation
and delay is condoned. Application be numbered.
(H.L.GOKHALE, J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
The Commissioner of Income-tax
Late Shri P.R. Kamani L/h. D.P.Kamani
H.L.GOKHALE
J.P.DEVADHAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court