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

The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.tarun Shipping & Inds.ltd

High Court 10 Jun 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.tarun Shipping & Inds.ltd
Date of order
10 Jun 2008
Assessment year(s)
1998-1999
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.tarun Shipping & Inds.ltd, 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

( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4410 OF 2007 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4410 OF 2007 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4410 OF 2007 IN IN IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.32 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax .. Appellant Vs. M/s.Tarun Shipping & Inds.Ltd. .. Respondent Mr.R.Asokan for the Appellant. Mr.Sameer Dalal for the Respondent. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & A.V.NIRGUDE, JJ. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & A.V.NIRGUDE, JJ. DATE : 10th June, 2008 P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. By this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is seeking condonation of 1425 days delay caused in filing the Appeal. Last time, we found the affidavit in support of the Notice of Motion to be totally unsatisfactory, hence we had directed the Appellant to file better affidavit thereby explaining the delay in a fair and reasonable manner. Mr.Asokan, the learned Counsel for the Appellant states that the concerned officer is on leave and will resume on 16th June, 2008 and hence the better affidavit has not been filed. So far as appeal is concerned, it pertains to the Assessment Year 1998-1999 and the ITAT’s order is dated 14th June, 2002 and hence, we do not find any reasonable ground to grant any further adjournment. Any officer of the Appellant other than the aforesaid concerned officer who has gone on leave, could have filed better affidavit explaining the ( 2 ) delay, but there is no such better affidavit. It seems that the Appellant has no interest in pursuing the matter. The affidavit in support does not even mention as to when the folder was sent to the Advocate for drafting the memo of Appeal. The said affidavit is totally silent about the delay. No sufficient cause is made out for condoning the delay caused in filing the Appeal. Hence, the Notice of Motion stands dismissed. 2. In view of dismissal of the Notice of Motion, the ITXA (L) No.32 of 2007 also stands dismissed. (A.V.NIRGUDE, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (A.V.NIRGUDE, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,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