In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Eagle Films, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.4495 OF 2007ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.4495 OF 2007
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO.2247 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... AppellantVs.
M/s Eagle Films... Respondent
Mr. A.D. Kango with Mr. P.S. Sahadevan forAppellant.None for Respondent.
P.C. :-
1)Heard learned counsel for the appellantand the learned counsel for the repondent. TheMotion is filed for condonation of 990 days delayin filing the above appeal. Perused the affidavitfiled in support of the Notice of Motion. Theimpugned order is dated 20-07-2004. The ChiefCommissioner of Income Tax granted approval on31/12/2004 for filing the appeal. However, theappeal was filed on 27-09-2007 i.e. after lapse
of 2 years 9 months. The reasons given for thedelay in filing the appeal is due to processing ofmatter, appointment of panel counsel and nonavailability of stamp papers The reasons given aretotally unsatisfactory. No case is made out forcondoning the delay. Notice of Motion isdismissed with no order as to costs.
2)Notice of Motionis disposed ofaccordingly with no order as to costs.
( DR.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.)
( 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.