Case LawHigh Court › Mumbai City 16 v. M/S. Shakti Steels

Mumbai City 16 v. M/S. Shakti Steels

High Court 24 Apr 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Mumbai City 16 v. M/S. Shakti Steels
Date of order
24 Apr 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Mumbai City 16 v. M/S. Shakti Steels, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal.

Decision: In view of the dismissal of the notice of motion, the appeal also stands dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 4021 OF 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 4021 OF 2007 INCENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL (L) NO. 2496 OF 2007 IN CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL (L) NO. 2496 OF 2007 Commissioner of Income Tax Mumbai City 16. .. Appellant. vs. M/s. Shakti Steels. .. Respondents. Mr. S.M. Shah for Appellant. None for the Respondents. CORAM: DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM: DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN &SANTOSH BORA, JJ. SANTOSH BORA, JJ. DATE: 24TH APRIL, 2008. DATE: 24TH APRIL, 2008. P.C. . Heard the learned counsel for the parties. By this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is seeking condonation of 298 days delay caused in filing the Appeal. 2. Perused the affidavit-in-support of the Notice of Motion. The order is against the order of the 2 Commissioner of Income Tax dated 24.7.2006 and the Commissioner of Income-tax had granted approval for filing an Appeal on 30.1.2006 the Appeal came to be lodged belatedly on 23.10.2007. 3. We are not satisfied with the reasons given for delay that it was beyond the control of the Commissioner of Income-Tax. There is absolutely no merit in the reason given. No sufficient cause is made out for condonation of delay. Hence, Notice of Motion stands dismissed. 4. In view of the dismissal of the notice of motion, the appeal also stands dismissed. (DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (SANTOSH BORA, J.) (SANTOSH BORA, 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