Nma/128/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Mumbai v. M/S Vatayan Synthetics Pvt. Ltd
High Court
11 Apr 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/128/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Mumbai v. M/S Vatayan Synthetics Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
11 Apr 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Nma/128/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Mumbai v. M/S Vatayan Synthetics Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed 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.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARYORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.128 OF 2008IN
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.128 OF 2008
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO.2192 OF 2007
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO.2192 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant.
V/s.
M/s.Vatayan Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent.
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for appellant.
Mr.Raj Darak for respondent.
CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 11TH APRIL, 2008.
DATED : 11TH APRIL, 2008.
P.C. :-
P.C. :-
P.C. :-
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and
learned counsel for the respondent. The Motion is
filed for condonation of 272 days delay in filing the
above appeal. Perused the affidavit filed in support
of the Notice of Motion. The order of I.T.A.T. is
dated 24/7/2006. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax
granted approval on 5/12/2006 for filing the appeal.
However, the appeal was filed on 20/9/2007 i.e. after
a lapse of about 11 months. The reasons given for the
delay in filing the appeal is that the delay is due to
administrative difficulites and non availablity of
Court fees stamp, which were beyond the control of the
appellant’s office . The reasons given are totally
unsatisfactory. No case is made out for condoning the
delay. Notice of Motion is dismissed with no order as
to costs.
2. Notice of Motion is disposed of accordingly
with no order as to costs.
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.