Nma/3850/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mumbai City 03 v. M/S Regency Export Pvt. Ltd
High Court
11 Apr 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/3850/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mumbai City 03 v. M/S Regency Export Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
11 Apr 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Nma/3850/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mumbai City 03 v. M/S Regency Export Pvt. Ltd, 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.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARYORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3850 OF 2007IN
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3850 OF 2007
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO.1726 OF 2007
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO.1726 OF 2007
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO.1726 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant.
V/s.
M/s.Regency Export Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent.
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for appellant.
Mr.A.K.Jasani for respondent.
CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED : 11TH APRIL, 2008.
CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 11TH APRIL, 2008.
P.C. :-
P.C. :-
P.C. :-
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and
learned counsel for the respondent, though served. The
Motion is filed for condonation of 345 days delay in
filing the above appeal. Perused the affidavit filed
in support of the Notice of Motion. The order of
I.T.A.T. is dated 17/3/2006. The Chief Commissioner
of Income Tax granted approval on 8/8/2006 for filing
the appeal. However, the appeal was filed on 31/7/2007
i.e. after a lapse of 1 year. The reasons given for
the delay in filing the appeal is that there was delay
in drafting the appeal memo and it was beyond the
control of the appellant’s office. 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.