The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Industrial Development Bank Of India

kps *1*itxa.5438.10.5402.10.4.con IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2105 OF 2010ININCOME TAX APPEAL NO.5438 OF 2010 WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.5402 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax. ..Appellant -Versus- Industrial Development Bank of India. ..Respondents ........... Mr.Vimal Gupta, Senior Advocate a/w Ms.Padma Divakar, for the Appellant. Mr.Satish R. Mody a/w Ms.Aasifa Khan, for the Respondent. ........... CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARIAND B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ. DATE :- 03[rd] July, 2014 P.C.: (a)Notice of Motion No.2105/2010:- 1This Appeal No.5438/2010 is stated to be barred by time and that is how an application being Notice of Motion No.2105/2010 has been moved to condone the delay of 389 days in filing of this Appeal. The Registry has computed this delay, therefore, we proceed on the footing that the delay is of days specified in prayer clause (a) and the explanation for the same, therefore, must be sought. 2In that regard Mr.Gupta, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Revenue, invited our attention to the statements made in the affidavit in support of this Notice of Motion and which, according to him, constitute the sufficient cause for delay in filing of this Appeal. He submits that it is not merely an administrative delay or departmental and hierarchical issue, but there is genuine and sufficient cause which has been set out in the affidavit in support and affirmed by the competent/ authorized officer. 3Having noted the contents of this affidavit and finding that there is no reply thereto, so also, in the light of the order dated 09.07.2010 passed by the Honourable Supreme Court of India in the case of very Assessee that we proceed to condone the delay. The Appeal be, therefore, registered and numbered within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The Notice of Motion is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs. (b)Income Tax Appeal Nos.5438/2010 and 5402/2010:- 4We have heard Mr.Gupta, learned Senior Counsel appearing in support of these Appeals. We have also heard Mr.Mody, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent/Assessee. 5Mr.Gupta has fairly brought to our notice an order dated 19.03.2014 of the Division Bench to which one of us is party in the Income Tax Appeal No.1287/2011. The findings of fact and which are identical in this case have been held not giving rise to any substantial question of law. Consequently, the Appeal of the Revenue was dismissed. Following the same order and in identical appeal we proceed to dismiss the present Appeals. The Appeals are, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. (B.P. COLABAWALLA, J.) (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)