The Cit-9 v. M/S.elb Schiff (India) Ltd
High Court
17 Nov 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Cit-9 v. M/S.elb Schiff (India) Ltd
Date of order
17 Nov 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Cit-9 v. M/S.elb Schiff (India) Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: The reasons given for delay that the matter had to be examined at various levels of the Department to assess whether the matter is worth of appealing or not, the procedural requirement took considerable time including drafting of Appeal Memo etc., does not appear to be justifiable.
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.3056/2008 IN ITXA (L) NO.2771/2008
The CIT-9 .. Appellant
Vs.
M/s.ELB Schiff (India) Ltd. .. Respondent
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant.
None for the Respondent.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
V.C.DAGA, JJ.
DATE : 17th November, 2008
P.C.
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant. By
this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is seeking
condonation of 1324 days’ delay caused in filing the
Appeal. Perused the affidavit-in-support of the Notice
of Motion. The Appeal is against the ITAT’s order dated
17.6.2004. We are not satisfied with the reasons given
for condonation of delay. The reasons given for delay
that the matter had to be examined at various levels of
the Department to assess whether the matter is worth of
appealing or not, the procedural requirement took
considerable time including drafting of Appeal Memo
etc., does not appear to be justifiable. The affidavit
in support is totally vague. No sufficient cause is
made out for condonation of delay. Hence, Notice of
Motion stands dismissed.
2. In view of dismissal of the Notice of Motion, Income
Tax Appeal (L) No.2771/2008 also stands dismissed.
(V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,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