Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 Vadodara vs Gea Process Engineering India Pvt Ltd on 19 December, 2025

Author: G. S. Kulkarni

Bench: G. S. Kulkarni

      2025:BHC-OS:26474-DB                                                                                   100.IA(L).18355.2024.DOC



                                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                   ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

                                                   INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.18355 OF 2024
                                                                     IN
                                                    INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.8228 OF 2023

                                Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Vadodara                                   Applicant
                                             versus
                                GEA Process Engineering India Pvt.Ltd.                                            Respondent
                                                                   _______
                                Mr.Suresh Kumar for Applicant.
                                Mr.Harsh R.Kothari for the Respondent.
                                                                   _______
                                                                    CORAM:          G. S. KULKARNI &
                                                                                    AARTI SATHE, JJ.
                                                                    DATE:           19th December 2025
                                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 98 days. On the Respondent/Assessee being served, the Respondent is represented by Mr.Harsh Kothari, learned counsel. There is no written opposition filed to this application. Mr.Harsh Kothari although has orally 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 condonation of 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 application, 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 MANISH Digitally signed by MANISH SURESHRAO certainly provide for an appropriate justification and a sufficient cause shown by the SURESHRAO THATTE Date: 2025.12.24 THATTE 14:40:09 +0530 applicant in regard to the delay in filing the appeal. It is hence in the interest of justice Page 1 of 2 Manish Thatte ::: Uploaded on - 24/12/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 26/12/2025 21:54:15 :::

100.IA(L).18355.2024.DOC that the delay is condoned.

3. The Interim 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.

          (AARTI SATHE, J.)                            (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)




                                        Page 2 of 2
Manish Thatte


     ::: Uploaded on - 24/12/2025                            ::: Downloaded on - 26/12/2025 21:54:15 :::