The Commissioner of Income Tax-7 v. Sandoz P.Ltd
Case at a glance
Key paragraphs
- Para 11. None appears for the respondent though served. By this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is seeking condonation of 99 days’ delay caused in filing the Appeal. For the reasons stated in the affidavit-in-support of the Notice of Motion, sufficient cause is made out for…
Judgment
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan with Mr.A.D.Kango for the appellant None for the respondent CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & SANTOSH BORA, JJ. SANTOSH BORA, JJ. SANTOSH BORA, JJ. DATED : 17TH APRIL, 2008 DATED : 17TH APRIL, 2008 DATED : 17TH APRIL, 2008 P.C.:
#1. None appears for the respondent though served. By this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is seeking condonation of 99 days’ delay caused in filing the Appeal. For the reasons stated in the affidavit-in-support of the Notice of Motion, sufficient cause is made out for condonation of delay, and there is no case of inaction, negligence 2 or want of bonafide on the part of the Appellant. Hence, the Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
#2. Place the Appeal on board for admission in the month of August, 2008, subject to numbering. (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (SANTOSH BORA, J.) (SANTOSH BORA, J.) (SANTOSH BORA, J.)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.