Case Law › High Court › Nma/263/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Inco...

Nma/263/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - Mumbai v. M/S. Gitanjali Exports Corporation

High Court 09 Feb 2009 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · newos

Parties

Date of order

09 Feb 2009

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In Nma/263/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - Mumbai v. M/S. Gitanjali Exports Corporation, 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

ASNIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.263 OF 2009ININCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.2473 OF 2008The Commissioner of Income Tax. ..Appellant.Vs.M/s. Gitanjali Exports Corporation. ..Respondent.Mrs.Anuradha Mane for the Appellant.CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & R.S. MOHITE, JJ.DATE : 9TH FEBRUARY,2009.PC :1. This is a notice of motion for condoning 675 daysdelay 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 came to be filed on 31.7.2008.The delay between the period 27.9.2006 and 31.7.2008 hasnot been properly explained. In our view, therefore,the cause shown does not amount to sufficient cause.Notice of motion is therefore, dismissed. Consequentlyappeal 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.