Case LawHigh Court › Commissioner Of Income Taxinternational...

Commissioner Of Income Taxinternational Taxation, Chennai 34 v. Applicant(S

High Court 22 Jul 2025 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Taxinternational Taxation, Chennai 34 v. Applicant(S
Date of order
22 Jul 2025
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In Commissioner Of Income Taxinternational Taxation, Chennai 34 v. Applicant(S, the High Court (2025) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 22.07.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICEANDTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CMP No.9714 of 2025 in TCA SR No.20916 of 2025 Commissioner of Income TaxInternational Taxation, Chennai 34. Vs Applicant(s) Watanmal Boolchand Company Ltd., C/o. CRBS and Associates LLP, Chartered Accountants, No.37, 2nd St, Alagiri Nagar, Vadapalani, Chennai 26. Respondent(s) Prayer: Petition filed under Order IV, Rule 9(4) of the AS Rules to condone the delay of 175 days in representing the above tax case appeal. For Applicant(s): Mr.R.Karthik For Respondent(s): Mr.T.Banusekar ___________ Page 1 of 2 ORDER (Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard on the application for condonation of delay in re-submitting the appeal. 2. Taking into consideration the cause shown in the application, we are inclined to condone the delay in re-submitting the appeal. 3. Application for condonation of delay is allowed. List the appeal for admission. (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ) (BATTU DEVANAND,J) 22.07.2025 bbr ___________ Page 2 of 2
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan