Itxa/1746/2010 Of Director Of Income-Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai v. Ing Bank Nv., Mumbai
High Court
06 Jul 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1746/2010 Of Director Of Income-Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai v. Ing Bank Nv., Mumbai
Date of order
06 Jul 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/1746/2010 Of Director Of Income-Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai v. Ing Bank Nv., Mumbai, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Under these circumstances, we have no option but to dismiss both the appeals holding it to be barred by limitation.
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 JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 3005 OF 2008ANDINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.3006 OF2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax V/s.ING Bank Ltd.
..Appellant.
..Respondent.
Mr.Parag A. Vyas for appellant.None for respondent.
CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 6TH JULY, 2009.
P.C. :-
1.There is a delay of 239 days in ITXAL No.3005/08 and 189 days delay in ITXAL No.3006/08 in filing the appeals. No Notice of Motion has been taken out. At least no statement to that effect is being made. Under these circumstances, the appeals are liable to be dismissed being barred by limitation for want of Notice of Motion for condoning the delay.
2.It appears from the memo of appeal in both the appeals that there is a ground about delay, but no prayer for condoning the delay is made. No separate affidavit explaining the reasons for delay in filing the appeal is filed.
3.Apart from the above, the issue sought to be raised in the above appeals are covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank Ltd. V/s. CITreported in 187 ITR 541. Under these circumstances, we have no option but to dismiss both the appeals holding it to be barred by limitation.
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA, 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.