High Court Karnataka High Court

M/S Concorde Hitech City P Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 22 April, 2009

Karnataka High Court
M/S Concorde Hitech City P Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 22 April, 2009
Author: Manjula Chellur B.V.Nagarathna


IN was HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA, aANaA;egfi

mamas THIS was 22″*nax ow ApRzL,f2éQ9Q7j ~

PRESENT

rum HOK’BLE Mas. Jusrzfis fi§NqfiLA*cHfiLLv§”_:

359
was HOK’BLE MRS. Jfisficn fi.v,:§A@A§$§fi$
M1.$C. fr:i*«%L:§é§é:§;§9i9
{5¢3 §c{éffZ%69j°

5ErwBEN;”1%\i fi

Mjs._GQndo£dégKitech City (9; Ltd.,

3230. E42, “*E’??f5. B ,
Jayapagar,’£aa§a;¢re*,’

Through.sri. %{S§V$hiV&rama

hairman mf Rp@h1laht’Capany APPELLANT

<gy"s;1 3 zafiatnva Kamath)

1=V i. ffié,Siat§*o£ Karnataka

V7Thrd$gh: The Secretary
=. Finnnfie Dapartment
' vidhana Soudha
Baggalare

"v.2:f$he Addl. Camissioner

' cf Cammexcial Taxes,
Zone~I,Van3iya Terige Kayalaya
Gandhinagar
Bangaiore RESPOKBERTS

Misc. CIVIL is filed under section 5 of the

Limitation Act for condoning the delay in filing
the apeal.

This Misc. CV1. cing on for orde;s;K;his
day, MARJ§LA CHELLUR 3, made the £ollowifigEz: ‘a

0 R D E R

Misc. Civil8GOI/09 is §;1cwe&”d$fid§fiifig thé.

delay of 59 Gays in filing the ag@éai»

Eist the zatter for adgfiaionflaftgr émfinefu

vacation, 2069.

%

Iiifiégé

‘sA:<,+:é2e.4_o9 '- —-