The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.metropolitan Trading Co
High Court
21 Apr 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.metropolitan Trading Co
Date of order
21 Apr 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.metropolitan Trading Co, 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.
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2499 OF 2007
IN
IN
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2381 OF 2006
The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Metropolitan Trading Co. ..Respondent
Mr.R.G.Bhat for the Appellant.
Mr.V.B.Patel for the Respondent.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &SANTOSH BORA, JJ.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
SANTOSH BORA
DATE : 21ST APRIL, 2008
DATE : 21ST APRIL, 2008
P.C.
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. By
this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is seeking
condonation of 275 days’ delay caused in filing the
Appeal against the order dated 12/08/2005 passed by the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Perused the
affidavit-in-support of the Notice of Motion. It
appears that the last date for filing of Appeal was
15/02/2006 . The Commissioner of Income Tax had granted
approval for filing an Appeal on 24/10/2005. On perusal
of paragraph 2 of the Affidavit-in-reply it appears that
the draft memo of Appeal was received by the Appellant
on 23/03/2006. However, the Appeal came to be filed
only on 17/11/2006. There is absolutely no explanation
with regard to the aforesaid delay except to state that
the Appellant was following the matter diligently and
the reasons for delay given that of beyond the control
of the Appellant’s office.
:2:
2. The reasons given for delay that of getting the
draft memo of Appeal prepared and administrative
difficulties etc. does not appear to be justifiable.
No sufficient cause is made out for condoning the delay.
We are not satisfied with the reasons given for
condonation of delay. Hence, Notice of Motion stands
dismissed.
3. In view of dismissal of the Notice of Motion, Income
Tax Appeal (L) No.2381 of 2006 also stands dismissed.
(SANTOSH BORA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(SANTOSH BORA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,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.