Case Law › High Court › Nma/267/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Inco...

Nma/267/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - Mumbai v. M/S. Sheel Gems

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/267/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - Mumbai v. M/S. Sheel Gems, 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.267 OF 2009ININCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.2539 OF 2008The Commissioner of Income Tax...Appellant.Vs.M/s. Sheel Gems...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 1240 daysdelay in filing the main appeal.2. On perusing the affidavit in support, it appearsthat the approval for filing the appeal was granted on8.11.2004 but the appeal came to be filed more thanthree years and nine months later, on 2.8.2008. Thedelay caused between the period 8.11.2004 and 2.8.2008has not been properly explained. In our view.therefore, the cause shown does not amount to sufficientcause. 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.