The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Icici Bank Ltd
High Court
09 Jul 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Icici Bank Ltd
Date of order
09 Jul 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Icici Bank Ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 2.In this view of the matter, all the 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.262 OF 2009WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.263 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.Shantilal L.Chheda
..Appellant..Respondent
WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.264 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.Durgesh L.Chheda
..Appellant
..Respondent
WITH
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.265 OF 2009WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.266 OF 2009WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.270 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.Late Sri Laliji C. Chheda
..Appellant
..Respondent
Mr.K.R.Choudhari for appellant.None for respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.271 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.M/s.BASF India Ltd. Mr.D.A.Athavale for appellant.None for respondent.
..Appellant..Respondent
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.370 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.M/s.Shirpur Gold Refinery Ltd..
..Appellant..Respondent
Mr.Suresh Kumar for appellant.None for respondent.
The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant Vs.M/s.Unity Construction Co...Respondent
Mr.A.S.Shivsharan for appellant.None for respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.389 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant Vs.M/s.B.Vijaykumar & Co. ..Respondent
Padma Divekar for appellant.Mr.S.J.Mehta for respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.392 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant Vs.M/s.Amar Tea Ltd. ..Respondent
Mr.D.Athavale for appellant.Mr.V.S.Hadade for respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.393 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant Vs.M/s.Ashok Pratap and Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
Ram Upadhyay for appellant.Usha Dalal for respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.394 OF 2009The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant Vs.M/s.Gateway Disriparks Ltd. ..Respondent
Mr.Ram Upadhyay for appellant.Mr.Sanjiv Shah for respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.395 OF 2009The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant Vs.M/s.Balmaccan Properties Pvt. Ltd. ..RespondentMr.Ram Upadhyay for appellant.Mr.Sanjiv Shah for respondent.
The Commissioner of Income Tax
Vs.Birla Yamaha Ltd.
..Appellant
..Respondent
Mr.Vimal Gupta for appellant.Mr.S.J.Mehta for respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.397 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.
ICICI Bank Ltd.
..Appellant
..Respondent
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for appellant.None for respondent.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.398 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.
Extermpore Securities and Investments Pvt.Ltd.
..Appellant
..Respondent
Mr.Vimal Gupta for appellant.Mr.A.K.Jasani for respondent.
CORAM :- V.C.DAGA &
J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ.
DATE :
9TH JULY, 2009
1.All these appeals are barred by limitation. Admittedly, no notices of motion are taken out. There is no prayer for condonation of delay. 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 Excise reported in 2009 (238) ELT 705 (S.C.), we have held in the case of CIT V/s. Grasim Industries Ltd. (Notice of Motion No.787 of 2009 in I.T.A. (L) No.3592 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 appeals are dismissed being barred by limitation with no order as to costs.
(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.