Case LawHigh Court › Nma/1746/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Inc...

Nma/1746/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 10, Mumbai v. M/S Infrastructure Leasing And Finance Services Limited

High Court 30 Apr 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/1746/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 10, Mumbai v. M/S Infrastructure Leasing And Finance Services Limited
Date of order
30 Apr 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Nma/1746/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 10, Mumbai v. M/S Infrastructure Leasing And Finance Services Limited, 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

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1746/2006 IN IRXA (L) NO.5/2006 (The CIT Mumbai V/s.M/s.Infrastructure Leasing & Finance Services Ltd.) ____________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memo- ¦ -randa of Coram, Apperances¦ Court’s or Judges Orders Courts orders or directions¦ and Prothonotary’s orders ¦ -------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM: DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM: DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM: DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & A.V.NIRGUDE, JJ. A.V.NIRGUDE, JJ. 30th April, 2008 : DATE30th April, 2008 : DATE : DATE P.C.: P.C.: . Heard Mr.Vimal Gupta for the Appellant & Mr.Sameer Dalal for Respondent. By this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is seeking condonation of 336 days’ delay caused in filing the Appeal. It appears that though the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax had granted approval for filing an Appeal on 26.5.2005 the Appeal came to be filed belatedly on 2.6.2006 after a lapse of almost one year. The reasons given for delay viz.beyond the control of the appellant’s office etc. does not appear to be justifiable. No sufficient cause is made out for condonation of delay. Hence, Notice of Motion stands dismissed. 2. In view of dismissal of the Notice of Motion, Interest Tax Appeal (L) No.5/2006 also stands dismissed. (A.V.NIRGUDE, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (A.V.NIRGUDE, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,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