Bombay High Court
PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 8 MUMBAIversus9X MEDIA P LTD AY 2012 13 ITA 4600 MUM 2017
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court condoned the 69‑day delay in filing the appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act.
Summary
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax filed an interim application seeking condonation of a 69‑day delay in filing an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. The Respondent, 9X Media P Ltd, failed to appear despite service of notice. The Court examined the applicant’s justification for the delay and found it reasonable and not gross. Accordingly, the Court held that justice required condoning the delay. The interim application was allowed, disposing the matter without costs and directing removal of any office objections within eight weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the 69‑day delay in filing the appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act can be condoned?
Legislation cited
- Income Tax Act — s. 260A
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- Income Tax Act
- Section 260A
- interim application
- procedural law
- justice
Judgment
Digitally
signed by
SHAMBHAVI
SHAMBHAVI NILESH
NILESH SHIVGAN
SHIVGAN Date:
2026.09.17
302- IA-2992-2024.DOC
13:15:44
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2992 OF 2024
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 27208 OF 2024
Principal Commissioner of Income
Tax 8, Mumbai ...Applicant/Appellant
Versus
9X Media P Ltd AY 2012-13 ...Respondent
_______
Mr P A Narayanan, for Applicant/Appellant.
None for Respondent.
_______
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATE: 11 SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C.
1. Despite service of notice, none appears for the Respondent. An affidavit of
service to that effect is placed on record.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the Applicant/Appellant 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 69 days.
3. 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
Page 1 of 2
Shivgan
302- IA-2992-2024.DOC
in the interest of justice that the delay is condoned.
4. The application is hence allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Interim
application stands disposed of in the above terms. No costs.
5. Let the office objections, if any, be removed within a period of 8 weeks from
today.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)
Page 2 of 2
Shivgan
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.