Case Law › High Court › Nma/249/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Inco...

Nma/249/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -16, Mumbai v. M/S. Sanghavi Exports

High Court 06 Feb 2009 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · newos

Parties

Date of order

06 Feb 2009

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In Nma/249/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -16, Mumbai v. M/S. Sanghavi Exports, the High Court (2009) 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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.249 OF 2009ININCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.2476 OF 2008The Commissioner of Income Tax...Appellant.Vs.M/s. Sanghavi Exports...Respondent. M/s. Sanghavi Exports. Mrs. Anuradha Mane with P.S.Sahadevan for theAppellant. PC : CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & R.S. MOHITE, JJ.DATE : 6TH FEBRUARY,2009. 1. This is a notice of motion for condoning 605-days delay in filing the main appeal. 2. On perusing the affidavit in support, it appearsthat the approval for filing the appeal was granted on27.9.2006 but the appeal was filed almost two years andtwo months later, on 31.7.2008. The delay between theperiod 27.9.2006 and 31.7.2008 has not been properlyexplained. In our view, therefore, the cause shown doesnot amount to sufficient cause. Notice of motion is therefore dismissed. Consequently appeal dismissed. Certified copy expedited. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, 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.