Case LawHigh Court › Incit v. Maruti Suzuki (India) Limited:...

Incit v. Maruti Suzuki (India) Limited: 362 Itr 215, This Court Held

High Court 17 Mar 2015 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Incit v. Maruti Suzuki (India) Limited: 362 Itr 215, This Court Held
Date of order
17 Mar 2015
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In Incit v. Maruti Suzuki (India) Limited: 362 Itr 215, This Court Held, the High Court (2015) allowed the appeal.

Decision: The writ petition stands disposed of.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

$~36 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+W.P.(C) 2540/2015 M/S VODAFONE SOUTH LTD ..... Petitioner Through :Mr Sachit Jolly with Mr Rahul Sateejaversus DY. COOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX & ANRThrough :Ms Suruchi Aggarwal ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMEDHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA O R D E R%17.03.2015CM 4556/2015 Allowed subject to all just exceptions. WP(C) 2540/2015 and CM 4555/2015 By way of this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking extension of the staygranted by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to the petitioner in Appeal, beingITA No.994/Del/2014, which is pending before the said Tribunal. The Tribunalhad earlier granted stay and had been extending the stay from time to time andthe last extension of stay was granted on 10.10.2014 for a period of six monthsto expire on 20.03.2015. InCIT v. Maruti Suzuki (India) Limited: 362 ITR 215, this Court held that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal cannot extend stay beyond the period of365 days in view of the proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Income Tax Act,1961.The said decision, however, held that in appropriate cases, the HighCourt could grant extension of stay in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article226 of the Constitution of India. It is in these circumstances that the petitionerhas filed this writ petition. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The matter pendingbefore the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is ready for hearing. The petitionerhas had the benefit of stay throughout the pendency of the appeal before theTribunal and we, therefore, feel that this is a fit case in which this Court oughtto extend the stay already granted by the Tribunal. Consequently, we extend the stay earlier granted by the Tribunal till thedisposal of the appeal by the said Tribunal. We hope and expect that theTribunal shall dispose of the matter at the earliest and shall list the matter forhearing on 13.07.2015 when the group company’s cases are already fixed. The writ petition stands disposed of. Dasti. BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J MARCH 17, 2015SR SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
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