The Bombay High Court dismissed a notice of motion for condoning a 247-day delay in filing an income tax appeal. The court found the explanation regarding the interval between appeal filing and receipt to be non-application of mind. Consequently, the appeal was also dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
:1:
| IN THE HIGH COURT ORDINARY ORIGINAL |
OF JUDI CIVIL |
CATURE | AT JURIS |
BOMBAY DICTION |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NOTICE OF |
MOTION | NO.649 | OF | 2007 | |
| IN INCOME TAX APPEAL |
LODGING | NO.28 | 04 OF |
2006 | |
| The Comm | issioner of Income TDS. Vs. |
..Appell | ant. | ||
| M/s. SMS | India Pvt. Ltd. | ..Respon | dent. | ||
| Mr.A.D.Ka | ngo for |
the | Appellant. | ||
| Mr.A.K.Ja | sani for |
the | R | espondent. | |
| CORAM : F.I. R DATED : |
EBELLO & 3RD |
R.S. |
MOHI DECEM |
TE, JJ. BER,2007. |
|
| PC | : | ||||
| 1. | This is a Notice of |
Motion for |
condon | ing delay |
of |
| 247 | days in filing the |
aforesaid |
main | appeal. | On |
| perusal | of the affidavit in |
support of |
the | Notice | of |
| motion, | it appears that ITAT |
order was |
receiv |
ed in |
the |
| office | of CIT on 29.12.2005 |
. The |
CIT | Judicial | received |
| the | report on 17.3.2006 |
and the |
Chief | CIT | granted |
| approval | for filing appeal |
on | 19.4. | 2006. | The |
| explanation | given however, |
is in re |
spect | of | matters |
| which | occurred in Nov.2005, |
which | are | completely | |
| irrelevant | and indicate non |
application | of |
mind. | There |
| is | no proper explanation as |
to what |
happened | after |
the |
| Chief | CIT granted approval o |
n 19.4.2006. |
It | is |
stated |
| that | the Officer read the |
Memo of |
Appeal | on | 14.3.2006 |
| and | filed the appeal on |
22.12.2006. | The | period | between |
| 14.3.2006 | and 22.12.2006 is |
not properly |
expl |
ained. | The |
cause shown is not sufficient. Hence, Notice of motion
is dismissed.
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)
(F.I. REBELLO, J.)
:2:
| IN | THE HIG ORDINARY |
H COURT ORIGINAL |
OF JUDIC CIVIL |
ATURE AT J |
BOMBAY URISDICTION |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IN | COME TAX |
APPEAL | LODGING | NO.2804 | OF 2006 |
|
| The Com | mission | er of Income TDS. Vs. |
..Appellant. | |||
| M/s. SM | S India | Pvt. Ltd. | ..Respondent. | |||
| Mr.A.D. | Kango | for | the | Appellant. | ||
| Mr.A.K. | Jasani | for | the | Respondent. | ||
| CORAM : DATED |
F.I. REB : |
ELLO & 3RD |
R.S. MO DE |
HITE, JJ. CEMBER,2007. |
||
| PC | : | |||||
| 1. | As | the Notice |
of Motion |
for cond |
onation of |
delay has |
| been dis | missed, | appeal stands dismi | ssed. Refund of | |||
| court fee | as per r | ules. Certified copy | expedited. |
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)
(F.I. REBELLO, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the explanation given for condoning a delay of 247 days in filing an income tax appeal is sufficient.
The Commissioner of Income TDS
M/s. SMS India Pvt. Ltd.
F.I. Rebello
R.S. Mohite
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
