Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/1676/2010 Of The Commissioner Of In...

Itxa/1676/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -10, Mumbai v. M/S Bombay Drugs And Pharmas Ltd.,Mumbai

High Court 06 Jul 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1676/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -10, Mumbai v. M/S Bombay Drugs And Pharmas Ltd.,Mumbai
Date of order
06 Jul 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/1676/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -10, Mumbai v. M/S Bombay Drugs And Pharmas Ltd.,Mumbai, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: Learned counsel is also unable to state as to whether any Notice of Motion is taken out.

Decision: In this view of the matter, appeal is dismissed being barred by limitation, with no order as to costs.

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 BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 2839 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Bombay Drugs & Pharmas Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for appellant. None for respondent. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 6tH JULY, 2009. P.C. :- Heard learned counsel for the revenue. There is a delay of two in filing the appeal. No Notice of Motion is taken out seeking condonation of delay and there is also no prayer clause, though there is contention in the memo of appeal about the delay in filing the appeal.. Learned counsel is also unable to state as to whether any Notice of Motion is taken out. In this view of the matter, appeal is dismissed being barred by limitation, with no order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA, 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