The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.videocon International Ltd
High Court
14 Jan 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.videocon International Ltd
Date of order
14 Jan 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.videocon International 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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4314 OF 2006
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1379 OF 2006
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax .. Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Videocon International Ltd. .. Respondents
Mr.Vimal Gupta for the appellant
Ms.Neeta Rajda i/b DSR Associates for the
respondents
CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
SANTOSH BORA, JJ.
SANTOSH BORA, JJ.
DATED : 22ND APRIL, 2008
DATED : 22ND APRIL, 2008
P.C.:
1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
By this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is seeking
condonation of 255 days’ delay caused in filing the
Appeal. However, the learned counsel for the
respondent states that the delay is over 400 days.
2. Perused the affidavit-in-support of the
2
Notice of Motion. It appears that though the last
date for filing the Appeal was 15.11.05 and the
Commissioner of Income Tax had granted approval for
filing an Appeal on 16.09.05 the Appeal came to be
filed belatedly on 21.12.06 i.e. after a lapse of
almost 1 year and 3 months.
3. We are not satisfied with the reasons given
for condonation of delay. The reasons given for
delay is that of getting the memo of appeal drafted
and court fee stamps were not readily available do
not appear to be justifiable. No sufficient cause
is made out for condonation of delay. Hence,
Notice of Motion stands dismissed.
4. In view of the dismissal of the Notice of
Motion, Income Tax Appeal (L) No.1379 of 2006 also
stands dismissed.
(DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.)
(DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.)
(SANTOSH BORA, J.)
(SANTOSH BORA, 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.
EaseValue