The Commissioner Of Income Tax – City Vii v. M/S.siemens Limited
High Court
21 Jul 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – City Vii v. M/S.siemens Limited
Date of order
21 Jul 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – City Vii v. M/S.siemens Limited, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 2.In this view of the matter, all these appeals are dismissed being barred by limitation 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
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1196 OF 2008
ANDINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1198 OF 2008ANDINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1200 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax – City VIIVersusM/s.Siemens Limited
..Appellant.
..Respondent.
Mr.P.S. Sahadevan for the appellant.Mr.Rajiv Singh i/by Chitnis & Co. for the respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1428 OF 2008
ANDINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1431 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax – VI
VersusM/s.Akay Organics Private Limited
..Appellant.
..Respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1429 OF 2008
ANDINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1433 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax – VI, Mumbai..AppellantVersusM/s.Atharva Builders Private Limited, Mumbai
..Respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1430 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax – VI, Mumbai..AppellantVersusM/s.Ifflunik Pharmaceuticals Limited..Respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1432 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax – VI, Mumbai..AppellantVersusShri Ashok P. Hinduja..Respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1434 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax – VI, Mumbai..AppellantVersusM/s.Antop Hill Warehousing Co. Limited..Respondent.
Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant in all the appeals.None for the respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1486 OF 2008
CORAM : V.C. DAGA & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATE : 21ST JULY, 2009.
P.C. :
1.As the revenue has sought extension of time for removing office objections as per the conditional order passed earlier, all these matters have been placed for direction. In all these matters, it is found that the appeal are time-barred. There is no prayer for condonation of delay in these appeals. No sufficient cause is shown. Apart from this, following the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Chaudharana Steels (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 IndustriesLtd. [Notice of Motion No.787 of 2009 in Income Tax Appeal (L) No.3592 of 2008]decided on 8/7/2009that this Court has no power to condone the delay in filing the appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2.In this view of the matter, all these appeals are dismissed being barred by limitation with no order as to costs.
(J.P. Devadhar, J.)
(V.C. Daga, 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