Maruti Metal Industries v. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1
High Court
23 Jan 2020 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Maruti Metal Industries v. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1
Date of order
23 Jan 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Maruti Metal Industries v. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1, the High Court (2020) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
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
C/CA/2997/2019 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2997 of 2019In F/TAX APPEAL NO. 28427 of 2019
==========================================================
MARUTI METAL INDUSTRIES Versus
JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1
==========================================================
Appearance:
DARSHAN R PATEL(8486) for the Applicant(s) No. 1RULE SERVED(64) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANIandHONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN Date : 23/01/2020 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN)
1.By this application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, the applicant seeks condonation of delay of 48 days caused in filing the captioned tax appeal wherein, the order dated 13.3.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench -'A', Ahmedabad in ITA No.2457/AHD/2014 is the subject matter of the appeal.
2.Heard Mr. Darshan R. Patel, learned advocate for the applicant and Mrs. Mauna M. Bhatt, learned advocate for the respondent.
3.Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned advocates for the respective parties and more particularly, considering the averments made in the memorandum of application, the court is of the view that the delay caused in filing the tax appeal has been sufficiently
explained.
4.The application, therefore, succeeds and is, accordingly, allowed. The delay caused in filing the captioned tax appeal is hereby condoned.
5.Rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs.
(HARSHA DEVANI, J)
BINOY B PILLAI
(SANGEETA K. VISHEN,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.