Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-10 Delhi v. Mahesh Chand Goyal
High Court
11 Sep 2025 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-10 Delhi v. Mahesh Chand Goyal
Date of order
11 Sep 2025
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-10 Delhi v. Mahesh Chand Goyal, the High Court (2025) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
$~80
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 410/2025
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-10 DELHI
.....Appellant
Through: Mr. Abhishek Maratha, SSC with Mr. Apoorv Agarwal, Mr. Parth Samwal, JSCs with Ms. Nupur Sharma, Mr. Gaurav Singh, Mr. Bhanukaran Singh Jodha, Ms. Muskan Goel, Mr. Himanshu Gaur and Mr. Nischay Purohit, Advs. Apoorv Agarwal, Mr. Parth Samwal, JSCs with Ms. Nupur Sharma, Mr. Gaurav Singh, Mr. Bhanukaran Singh Jodha, Ms. Muskan Goel, Mr. Himanshu Gaur and Mr. Nischay Purohit, Advs.
versus
MAHESH CHAND GOYAL
.....Respondent
Through:
Appearance not given
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAOHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR
O R D E R11.09.2025
% 11.09.2025CM APPL. 57626/2025 and CM APPL. 57627/2025 (Delay)
1. For the reasons stated in the applications, delay of 49 days in filing
the appeal and delay of 549 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned.
2. The applications are disposed of.
ITA 410/2025
3. Mr. Abhishek Maratha, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing
for appellant states that the appeal needs to be closed on the ground of Low Tax Effect.
4. It is ordered accordingly.
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J
SEPTEMBER 11, 2025
cd
VINOD KUMAR, 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