Allowed¶14

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax 41 v. Manisha Construction Company

Income Tax – Condonation of delay

Bombay HC19 Dec 2025IA/6458/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 41 v. Manisha Construction Company; Bombay HC, OOCJ; Coram: G. S. Kulkarni & Aarti Sathe, JJ.; decided 19 December 2025; IA No. 6458 of 2025 in ITA(L) No. 28926 of 2023; condonation of 03-day delay in filing income tax appeal under Section 260A, Income Tax Act; delay held not gross, sufficient cause shown; application allowed, no costs; respondent served but unrepresented and unopposed; counsel: Suresh Kumar for Revenue.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 03 days in filing Income Tax Appeal (L) No. 28926 of 2023 condoned; Interim Application allowed in terms of prayer clause (a); appeal to be listed for admission subject to removal of objections, if any, within ten weeks; no costs. ¶14

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax 41 vs Manisha Construction Company — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

140.IA.6458.2025.DOC

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.6458 OF 2025 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L).NO.28926 OF 2023

¶4

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 41 Applicant

¶5

versus Manisha Construction Company Respondent

¶6

Mr.Suresh Kumar for Applicant. None present for the Respondent.

¶7

CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &

¶8

AARTI SATHE, JJ.

¶9

DATE: 19^th December 2025

¶10

P.C.

¶11

We have heard learned counsel for the parties on this Interim Application which is filed praying for condonation of delay in filing the aforesaid appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. The delay which is sought to be condoned is of 03 days. Though the Respondent/Assessee being served, nobody appears for the Respondent. There is no written opposition filed to this application. There cannot be any dispute as to the well settled position in law in a catena of judgments of the Supreme Court in regard to the principles to be followed on condonation of delay and more particularly in the clear facts and circumstances of the case, as set out in the memo of the application, the Applicant/Revenue ought not to suffer or be rendered remediless in pursuing the Appeal, which seeks to raise a substantial question of law as raised in the memo of the Appeal.

¶12

MANISH Digitally signed byMANISH SURESHRAO SURESHRAO THATTE THATTE Date: 2025.12.2414:40:14 +0530

¶13

In the aforesaid circumstances, having perused the memo of the application and considering the period of delay not being very gross, in our opinion, the reasons as set out certainly provide for an appropriate justification and a sufficient cause shown by the applicant in regard to the delay in filing the appeal. It is hence in the interest of justice that the delay is condoned.

¶14