Bombay High Court
PRINICIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 6 MUMBAIversusBLACK BOX LIMITED - 2009-10
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court condoned the 81‑day delay and allowed the interim application.
Summary
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Mumbai filed an interim application seeking condonation of an 81‑day delay in filing an appeal under Section 260A of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961. The respondent, Black Box Ltd., was served but did not appear and raised no opposition. The Court examined the period of delay and the settled principles governing condonation applications. It held that the delay could be condoned despite its length. Consequently, the application was allowed, the appeal was ordered to be listed for admission after removal of any office objections, and no costs were awarded.
Issues considered
- Whether an 81‑day delay in filing an appeal under Section 260A of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961 can be condoned.
- Whether the absence of opposition from the respondent affects the decision on condonation.
Legislation cited
- Income Tax Act, 1961 — s. 260A
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- Income‑Tax Act
- Section 260A
- interim application
- procedural law
Judgment
311.IA2896_2026.DOC
2026:BHC-OS:19434-DB
Vidya Amin
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2896 OF 2026
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 20571 OF 2024
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Mumbai … Applicant/Appellant
Vs.
Black Box 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 81 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 already 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).
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 1 of 1
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge 28 August, 2026
Date: 31/08/2026 17:20:25
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.