Commissioner Of Income Tax V v. M/S Rajesh Marketing Services Ltd
High Court
18 Oct 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax V v. M/S Rajesh Marketing Services Ltd
Date of order
18 Oct 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax V v. M/S Rajesh Marketing Services Ltd, the High Court (2016) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In the circumstances, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed and consequently the appeal is also dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
$~9
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ITA 632/2016
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V
V ..... Appellant V ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Dileep Shivpuri, Sr. Standing Counsel along with Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Jr. Standing Counsel. Mr. Vikrant A. Maheshwari, Counsel along with Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Jr. Standing Counsel. Mr. Vikrant A. Maheshwari,
Advocate.
versus
M/S RAJESH MARKETING SERVICES LTD. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Rohit Kumar Gupta, Advocate along with Ms. Monika Ghai, Advocate. along with Ms. Monika Ghai, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA
O R D E R% 18.10.2016
CM No. 30468/2016 & ITA 632/2016
We notice in this appeal, the revenue seeks condonation of delay of 703 days. The explanation urged calls for condoning the delay and further delay in refilling the appeal are unacceptable. The plea taken by the revenue is unreasonable. In the circumstances, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed and consequently the appeal is also dismissed.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J
OCTOBER 18, 2016/sapna
DEEPA SHARMA, 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