In Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Audco (I) Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: As the motion for condoning delay is dismissed, appeal also stands dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2030 OF 2007
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.786 OF 2007
Commissioner of Income-tax- ..Appellant
Versus
Audco (I) Ltd., ..Respondent
----
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the appellant.
Mr.A.K.Jasani for the respondent.
----
Coram : F.I.Rebello &
R.S.Mohite,JJ
Date : 20.02.2008
PC
1. This is a motion for condoning 776 days delay in
filing of the main appeal. A perusal of the
affidavit-in-support indicates that the approval for
filing appeal was granted by CCIT-2 on 5.5.2005 and
thereafter the matter was sent for preparing the
appeal memo. The appeal ultimately came to be filed
on 18.4.2007. No dates have been given in respect
of the events which occurred between 5.5.2005 and
18.4.2007. In our view, cause shown does not amount
to sufficient cause. Hence motion dismissed.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.786 OF 2007
. As the motion for condoning delay is dismissed,
appeal also stands dismissed.
(R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,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