Bombay High Court
PRINICIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 6 MUMBAIversusTRANSLANDS INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPERS P. LTD. AY 12-13
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court condoned the delay in filing the appeal under Section 260A of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961.
Summary
The applicant, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Mumbai, filed an interim application seeking condonation of a 78‑day delay in filing an appeal under Section 260A of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961. The respondent, Translands Infrastructure Developers P. Ltd., was served but did not appear, and no opposition was filed. The Court examined the delay and applied the settled principles governing condonation applications. Finding the delay reasonable and unopposed, the Court ordered the delay to be condoned. Consequently, the appeal was directed to be listed for admission after removal of any office objections, and the interim application was disposed without costs.
Issues considered
- Whether the 78‑day delay in filing the 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
Judgment
312.IA2897_2026.DOC
2026:BHC-OS:19549-DB
Vidya Amin
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2897 OF 2026
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 20294 OF 2024
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Mumbai … Applicant/Appellant
Vs.
Translands Infrastructure Devleopers P. 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 78 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: 02/09/2026 12:07:20
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.