Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 8, Mumb...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 8, Mumbai v. Birla Sunlife Asset Management Co. Limited

High Court 21 Jul 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 8, Mumbai v. Birla Sunlife Asset Management Co. Limited
Date of order
21 Jul 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 8, Mumbai v. Birla Sunlife Asset Management Co. Limited, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Hence, all the appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2347/2009 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2447 OF 2008 AND NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2350/2009 IN INOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2454 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 8, Mumbai..Appellant.VersusBirla Sunlife Asset Management Co. Limited..Respondent. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2341/2009 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2448 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 8, MumbaiVersusEGL Eagle Global Logistics Private Limited ..Appellant...Respondent. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2380/2009 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2449 OF 2008ANDNOTICE OF MOTION NO.2298/2009 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2453 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 8, MumbaiVersusDatamatis Financial Software & Services Limited ..Appellant...Respondent. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2343/2009 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2450 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 8, Mumbai..Appellant.VersusAkshay Software Technologies Limited..Respondent. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2342/2009 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2451 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 8, Mumbai..Appellant.VersusEastern Peripherals Private Limited..Respondent. Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant in all the matters.None for the respondent in all the matters. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2155/2009 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1407 of 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 12, MumbaiVersusMahendra Mathuria ..Appellant. ..Respondent. Ms.Suchitra Kamble for the appellant.None for the respondent. CORAM : V.C. DAGA & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. P.C. : 1.Though there is delay in filing the appeals, no sufficient cause is shown. Apart from this, following the decision of the Apex Court in the case of ChaudharanaSteels (P) Ltd. V/s. Commissioner of Central Excisereported in 2009 (238) ELT 705(S.C.), we have held in the case of CIT V/s. Grasim Industries Ltd. (Notice of MotionNo.787 of 2009 in I.T.A. (L) No.3592 of 2008) decided on 8/7/2009, that this Court has no power to condone the delay in filing an appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2.In this view of the matter, all the notices of motion are dismissed being barred by limitation with no order as to costs. 3.In view of dismissal of notices of motions, appeals does not survive. Hence, all the appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs. (J.P. Devadhar, J.)(V.C. Daga, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan