Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. P...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Parle Beverages Ltd

High Court 15 Oct 2007 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Parle Beverages Ltd
Date of order
15 Oct 2007
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Parle Beverages Ltd, the High Court (2007) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
((-1-)) HVN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1444 OF 2006 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 781 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant Versus M/s. Parle Beverages Ltd. ... Respondent Mr. B.M. Chatterjee with Ms. P.P. Bhosale and Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for the Appellants. Mrs. Vasanti Patel for Respondent. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED: OCTOBER 15, 2007 J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED: OCTOBER 15, 2007 P.C. P.C. . There is delay of 240 days. There is affidavit in support of the Motion. The order was received on 5.5.2005. The Chief CIT granted approval for filing of the appeal on 26.8.2005. The file was sent to Ministry of Law on 26.8.2005 itself. Though it is not set out, we may take judicial notice that in December, 2005 the Ministry of law transferred all matters to department for preferring appeals by appointing new counsel. The docket was prepared on 2.2.2006. It is however, pointed out that as there was heavy workload of time barred assessment in the month of March 2006, the appeal could only be filed on 28.4.2006. Appearance put up on behalf of the ((-2-)) respondents. An affidavit has been filed also opposing the condonation of delay. Considering the facts set out and the difficulties that the department was and also considering the tax incidence, in our opinion, the cause shown would amount to sufficient cause. Hence, motion allowed in terms of Prayer Clause (a). Office to register the appeal. (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, 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