Nma/485/2013 Of M/S Anandsons Overseas Trading P Ltd v. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax -6 (1) And Anr
High Court
15 Mar 2013 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Nma/485/2013 Of M/S Anandsons Overseas Trading P Ltd v. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax -6 (1) And Anr
Date of order
15 Mar 2013
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Nma/485/2013 Of M/S Anandsons Overseas Trading P Ltd v. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax -6 (1) And Anr, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
sas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.485 OF 2013ININCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.345 OF 2013
M/s. Anandsons Overseas Trading P. Ltd.
..Appellant.
V/s.
The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-6(1), Mumbai & Ors.
..Respondent.
Mr. Subramanium with V.S. Hadade for the appellant.Ms. Padma Divakar for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ.
DATED : 15TH MARCH, 2013
P.C. :-
1.By this Notice of Motion, the appellant is seeking condonation of 1,864 days delay in filing an appeal against the order of the Tribunal dated 5[th] September, 2007. The reasons as set out in the affidavit in support of the Notice of Motion for the delay in filing the appeal was that they did not file an appeal earlier, however the issue is now covered in their favour by a decision in another assessee's case.
In fact, consequent to the decision rendered in the case of another assessee, they had filed an Miscellaneous Application before the Tribunal. However, the same was dismissed as it was filed beyond the period of four years. The appellant having accepted the decision of the Tribunal cannot now seek to revive the matter only in view of a decision in the case of another assessee. The reasons for the delay as made out in the affidavit in support do not warrant condining the delay. In this view of the matter, we see no reason to condone the delay. The Notice of Motion is dismissed with no order as to costs.
2.In view of the dismissal of the Notice of Motion, the appeal is consigned to record.
(M.S. SANKLECHA, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, 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.