In Nma/4252/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-13, Mumbai v. M/S. Padma Industries Mumbai, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: As the motion for condoning delay is dismissed, appeal also stands dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4252 OF 2006
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1624 OF 2006
Commissioner of Income-tax-13 ..Appellant
V/s.
M/s.Padma Industries ..Respondents
----
Mr.A.S.Rao with P.S.Sahadevan for appellant.
Mr.R.S.Champawat for respondents.
----
Coram : F.I.Rebello &
R.S.Mohite,JJ
Date : 11.02.2008
PC
1. This is a Motion for condoning 427 days delay in
filing of the main appeal. On perusal of the
affidavit in support, we find that the last date for
filing the appeal was 1.7.2005 but the same was
filed on 31.8.2006. No dates in respect of the
events which occured between these 2 dates have been
mentioned in the affidavit-in-support. In the
circumstances, cause shown does not amount to
sufficient cause. Hence, Notice of Motion
dismissed.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1624 OF 2006
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1624 OF 2006
. As the motion for condoning delay is dismissed,
appeal also stands dismissed.
(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.
EaseValue