Mumbai v. M/S. Hinduja Finance Corp. Mumbai
High Court
03 Dec 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Mumbai v. M/S. Hinduja Finance Corp. Mumbai
Date of order
03 Dec 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Mumbai v. M/S. Hinduja Finance Corp. Mumbai, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
VPH
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION No. 3243 OF 2008
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) No.2087 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income-Tax-8 Appellant
Mumbai
Vs
M/s. Hinduja Finance Corp. Mumbai ... Respondent
Mr. Suresh Kumar, for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
CORAM: Dr. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, &
V. C. DAGA, JJ.
DATED: DECEMBER 3, 2008.
P.C.:
----
. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.
Perused the Notice of Motion and the affidavit in
support thereof. The present Notice of Motion is
taken out by the appellant for condoning the delay of
547 days in filing the appeal against the order dated
9th August 2006 passed by the Tribunal in ITA No.
3341/ Mum/99. In the affidavit it is stated that the
Chief Commissioner of Income-tax has granted the
approval to file the above appeal on 21st February,
2007. However, the appeal came to filed on 14st July,
- 2 -
2008. The main reasons mentioned in the affidavit in
support of Notice of Motion for the delay in filing
the appeal, is drafting of large number of appeals and
obtaining Court-fee stamps and, purely due to
administrative exigencies and the procedural
formalities etc. We are not at all satisfied with the
reasoning given in the affidavit. No case is made out
for condoning the delay. In the result, Notice of
Motion is dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/-
[ V. C. DAGA, J.] [ Dr. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, 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.