Case LawHigh Court › Nma/1766/2005 Of The Commissioner Of Inc...

Nma/1766/2005 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-City-I v. M/S Air Lins Hotels Pvt Ltd

High Court 05 Sep 2007 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/1766/2005 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-City-I v. M/S Air Lins Hotels Pvt Ltd
Date of order
05 Sep 2007
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Nma/1766/2005 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-City-I v. M/S Air Lins Hotels Pvt Ltd, the High Court (2007) 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1766 0F 2005INWEALTH TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.731 OF 2005 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1766 0F 2005 IN WEALTH TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.731 OF 2005 AND AND AND NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1768 0F 2005 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1768 0F 2005 INWEALTH TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.732 OF 2005 IN WEALTH TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.732 OF 2005 AND AND NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1873 0F 2005 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1873 0F 2005 IN IN WEALTH TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.733 OF 2005 WEALTH TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.733 OF 2005 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s.AirLines Hotels Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.P.Sahadevan for appellant. Mr.Atul Jasani for respondent. CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 5TH SEPTENBER, 2007. DATED : 5TH SEPTENBER, 2007. P.C. :- There is a delay of 245 days in filing the appeal. There is affidavit filed in support of the Motion. From the affidavit, it is clear that the order was received in C.I.T. (A) on 11/6/2004. A scrutiny report was called for and submitted on 21/9/2004. There is no explanation for the delay between 11/6/2004 and 21/9/2004. Thereafter, the matter was referred to the Ministry of Law on 7/10/2004 and the appeal was preferred on 10/6/2005. There is also no explanation for the said period also. 2. Even otherwise, the tax incidence is less than Rs.4 lakhs. Considering the cause shown in the affidavit, it would not amount to sufficient cause. Hence Motions are dismissed. (F.I.REBELL0, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)(F.I.REBELL0, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I.REBELL0, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, 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