In Nma/1831/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-3 Mumbai v. M/S Aakrosh Investments And Leasing (P) Ltd. Mumbai, 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARYORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ORDINARY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1831 OF 2006 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO.967 OF 2006
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1831 OF 2006
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO.967 OF 2006
The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant.
V/s.
M/s.Aakrosh Investments & Leasing
(P) Ltd. ..Respondent.
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for appellant.
Mr.J.D.Mistry i/b. Raj Darak for respondent.
CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 7TH APRIL, 2008.
DATED : 7TH APRIL, 2008.
P.C. :-
P.C. :-
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and
learned counsel for the respondent. The Motion is
filed for condonation of 463 days delay in filing the
above appeal. Perused the affidavit filed in support
of the Notice of Motion. The impugned order is dated
27/8/2004. It appears that almost 14 months were taken
only to draft the memo of appeal. The appeal was filed
on 8/6/2006. The reasons given for the delay in filing
the appeal is that it was beyond the control of the
appellant’s office and non availability of Court fees
stamp. 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.