Nma/2477/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Mumbai v. M/S Aakrosh Investment And Leasing (P) Ltd
High Court
29 Apr 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/2477/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Mumbai v. M/S Aakrosh Investment And Leasing (P) Ltd
Date of order
29 Apr 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Nma/2477/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Mumbai v. M/S Aakrosh Investment And Leasing (P) Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In view of disposal of Noticeof Motion, the appeal also stands dismissed.
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
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2477 OF 2007ININCOME TAX APPEAL(LODG) NO.1221 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai
...Appellant
V/s.M/s. Aakrosh Investment & Leasing(P) Ltd. ...Respondent
Mr.Vimal Gupta with Mr.P.S. Sahadevan for Appellant.Mr.J.D. Mistri with Mr.Raj Darak for Respondent.
P.C.:-
CORAM : DR.S. RADHAKRISHNAN & A.V. NIRGUDE, JJ.
DATED : 29[th] APRIL, 2008.
1.Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for theRespondent. By this Notice of Motion, appellant is seeking condonation of275 days delay in filing appeal against order dated 31[st] March, 2006 passedby I.T.A.T. Perused the affidavit filed in support of Notice of Motion. TheChief Commissioner of Income Tax granted approval on 22[nd] August, 2006for filing the appeal. However, the appeal was lodged on 7[th] June, 2007 after
lapse of nearly 10 months. The reasons given for the delay in filing theappeal is that there was delay in getting the draft appeal memo and shortageof stamp papers in the office of CIT-3, Mumbai. We are not at all satisfiedwith the above reasons. No case is made out for condoning the delay. Noticeof motion is dismissed with no order as to costs. In view of disposal of Noticeof Motion, the appeal also stands dismissed.
(DR.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.)
(A.V. NIRGUDE, 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.