Income Tax 8 MumbaiversusPiramal Estates Pvt Ltd

         Digitally
         signed by
                                                                                         307-IA 3359-25.DOC
         PRAJAKTA
PRAJAKTA SAGAR
SAGAR    VARTAK
VARTAK   Date:
         2026.09.21
         11:46:19
         +0530

 Prajakta Vartak
                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                                INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3359 OF 2025
                                                IN
                               INCOME TAX APPEAL (L.) NO. 29122 OF 2024
             The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax 8 Mumbai                   ...Appellant/Applicant
                    Versus
             Piramal Estates Pvt. Ltd.                                     ...Respondent
                                                      __________

             Mr. Dhananjay Deshmukh (through VC) for Applicant/Appellant.
             Mr. Atul Jasani for Respondent.
                                                      __________

                                                    CORAM:         G. S. KULKARNI &
                                                                   Dr. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
                                                    DATE:          18 SEPTEMBER 2026.
             P.C.
             1.       We have heard learned counsel for the parties 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 58 days.
             There is no written opposition filed to this application. Mr. Jasani, learned counsel for
             the respondent, although has opposed this application, he would not dispute the well
             settled position in law in a catena of judgments of the Supreme Court in regard to the
             principles to be followed on condoning the delay and more particularly he would not
             dispute that, in the clear facts and circumstances of the case as set out in the memo of the
             applications, the applicant/Revenue ought not to suffer or be rendered remediless in
             pursuing the appeal, which seeks to raise a substantial question of law as raised in the
             memo of the appeal.
             2.       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.
             3.       The application is hence allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).
             4.       The appeal accordingly be listed for admission, subject to removal of objections,
             if any, to be removed within ten weeks from today.
             5.       Interim application stands disposed of in the above terms. No costs.


             (DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.)                                       (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)

                                                   Page 1 of 1
                                               18 September 2026