Nma/163/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Mumbai v. M/S. Tata Finance Ltd
High Court
12 Feb 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/163/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Mumbai v. M/S. Tata Finance Ltd
Date of order
12 Feb 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Nma/163/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Mumbai v. M/S. Tata Finance Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: As the motion for condonation of delay is dismissed, appeal is also dismissed.
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 BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.163 OF 2007ININCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.2596 OF 2006The Commissioner of Income Tax-2...Appellant.Vs.M/s. Tata Finance Ltd...Respondent.Mr. R. Ashokan with Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for theAppellant.Mr.P.C.Tripathi for the Respondent.CORAM : F.I. REBELLO &R.S. MOHITE, JJ.DATED : 12TH FEBRUARY,2008.PC :1. This is a notice of motion for condonation of 560days delay in filing the main appeal. On perusal of theaffidavit in support, we find that CIT(2) grantedapproval on 4.4.2005 and the appeal was filed on7.12.2006. No dates of events which occurred during theaforesaid period have been given. In our view,
therefore, cause shown does not amount to sufficient
case. Hence, notice of motion is dismissed.
INCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.2596 OF 2006
2. As the motion for condonation of delay is dismissed,
appeal is also dismissed.
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)
(F.I. REBELLO, 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.
EaseValue