Bombay High Court
PRINICIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 6 MUMBAIversusCITRUS CHECK INNS LIMITED AY 2014-15
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The court held that the 69‑day delay is condoned and the interim application is allowed.
Summary
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Mumbai filed an interim application seeking condonation of a 69‑day delay in filing an income‑tax appeal under Section 260A of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961. The respondent, Citrus Check Inns Ltd., was served but did not appear, and no opposition was filed. The court examined the length of the delay and applied the settled principles governing condonation of delay in tax matters. It found that the reasons for the delay warranted relief and that condoning the delay would not prejudice the respondent. Consequently, the court allowed the application, directing that any office objections be removed within eight weeks and the appeal be listed for admission. No costs were awarded.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of 69 days in filing an appeal under Section 260A of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961 can be condoned.
Legislation cited
- Income Tax Act, 1961 — s. 260A
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- Income‑Tax Appeal
- Section 260A
- procedural law
- High Court of Bombay
Judgment
306 TO 308.IA2230_2026.DOC
2026:BHC-OS:19444-DB
Vidya Amin
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2230 OF 2026
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 19080 OF 2024
AND
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2231 OF 2026
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 19120 OF 2024
AND
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2232 OF 2026
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 19082 OF 2024
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Mumbai … Applicant/Appellant
Vs.
Citrus Check Inns Ltd. … Respondent
_________
Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma for the applicant/applicant.
__________
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATE: 28 AUGUST, 2026.
P.C.
1. By this Interim Application, the applicant/appellant has prayed for
condonation of delay of 69 days in filing the aforesaid Appeal under Section
260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
2. Although the respondent is served, none appears for the respondent. An
affidavit of service to that effect is filed. Also, there is no opposition on behalf of
the respondent to this Interim Application.
3. We have perused the averments made in the application. Considering the
period of delay and the settled principles of law governing applications for
condonation of delay, in our opinion, it is appropriate that the delay is condoned.
4. The application is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).
Page 1 of 2
28 August, 2026
306 TO 308.IA2230_2026.DOC
5. Office objections, if any, be removed within a period of eight weeks from
today.
6. List the appeal for admission after the removal of office objections.
7. Interim Application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)
Signed by: Vidya S. Amin Page 2 of 2
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge 28 August, 2026
Date: 31/08/2026 17:31:18
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.