The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Reliance Industrial
High Court
09 Apr 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Reliance Industrial
Date of order
09 Apr 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Reliance Industrial, 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.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.175 OF 2008ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.175 OF 2008
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO.2420 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... AppellantVs.M/s Reliance Industrial... RespondentInfrastructure Ltd.
Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for AppellantMr. P.C. Tripathi i/by Mr. Raj Darak forRespondent
P.C. :-
1)Heard learned counsel for the appellantand learned counsel for the respondent. TheMotion is filed for condonation of 1457 days delayin filing the above appeal. Perused the affidavitfiled in support of the Notice of Motion. Theimpugned order is dated 26.05.2003. The ChiefCommissioner of Income Tax granted approval on 1stOctober,2003 for filing the appeal. However, theappeal was filed on 10th October, 2007 i.e. after
lapse of four years. The reasons given for thedelay in filing the appeal is administrativedifficulties and voluminous work of stamping,checking and preparation of appeal memo. Thereasons given are totally unsatisfactory. No caseis made out for condoning the delay. Notice ofMotion is dismissed 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.