Bombay High Court
PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 27 MUMBAIversusMAHAVEER RANKA HUF (AY 2010 11 ITA 965 MUM 2024)
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court condoned the 18‑day delay in filing the appeal under Section 260A.
Summary
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax filed an interim application seeking condonation of an 18‑day delay in filing an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. The respondent, Mahaveer Ranka HUF, failed to appear despite service of notice, and an affidavit of service was placed on record. The Court examined the applicant's justification for the delay and found it to be reasonable and not gross. Considering the reasons provided, the Court held that condoning the delay would serve the interests of justice. Consequently, the interim application was allowed, the delay was condoned, and no costs were awarded.
Issues considered
- Whether the 18‑day delay in filing the appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act can be condoned.
Legislation cited
- Income Tax Act, 1961 — s. 260A
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- Income Tax Act
- Section 260A
- interim application
- procedural law
Judgment
Digitally
signed by
SHAMBHAVI
SHAMBHAVI NILESH
NILESH SHIVGAN
SHIVGAN Date:
2026.09.17
321- IA-3281-2026.DOC
13:15:43
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3281 OF 2026
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 27781 OF 2025
Principal Commissioner of Income
Tax 27 Mumbai ...Applicant/Appellant
Versus
Mahaveer Ranka HUF (AY 2010-11) ...Respondent
_______
Mr Arjun Gupta, for Applicant/Appellant.
_______
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 18 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
in the interest of justice that the delay is condoned.
Page 1 of 2
Shivgan
321- IA-3281-2026.DOC
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.