Nma/4045/2008 Of Director Of Income-Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai v. Citi Bank N.a., Mumbai
High Court
07 Jan 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/4045/2008 Of Director Of Income-Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai v. Citi Bank N.a., Mumbai
Date of order
07 Jan 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Nma/4045/2008 Of Director Of Income-Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai v. Citi Bank N.a., Mumbai, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: On failure to pay, appeal to stand dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4045 OF 2008ININCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2885 OF 2008
Director of Income-taxBallard Pier, Mumbai-38
..Appellant
V/s.Citi Bank N.A.,’G’ Block, C-61, 5th Floor,Bandra Kurla Complex,Bandra (E), Mumbai-51..Respondent
Mr. Parag A. Vyas for AppellantMr. B.D. Damodar i/by Kanga & Co. for Respondent
P.C.:
1.There is a delay of 434 days in filing theappeal. There is an affidavit in support of themotion. The affidavit by itself does not make out thecase of sufficient cause. However, considering the taxincidence, we are inclined to condone the delay subjectto appellant paying costs to the respondent quantifiedat Rs.5,000/- within a period of 2 weeks from today.On such costs being paid, Office to register theappeal. On failure to pay, appeal to stand dismissed.
2.Notice of motion is disposed of accordingly.
( R.S. MOHITE,J.)
( F.I. REBELLO,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.