M/S THAKKER SHIPPING P.LTD. vs. COMMR.OF CUSTOMS(GENERAL)

Bench: The Appellate Authority”. 3. The Facts Leading To The Present Appeal Are These. A Container Was Intercepted By M & P Wing Of Commissioner Of Customs (Preventive), Mumbai On 11.01.2001. It Was Found To Contain Assorted Electrical & Electronic Goods Of Foreign Origin. The Said Goods Were Imported By M/S Qureshi International & The Cargo Was Cleared From Nhava Sheva. The Clearance Of The Goods Was Handled By M/S Thakker Shipping P. Ltd., The

delayed by 10 days, an application for condonation of delay was filed with a prayer for condonation. The Tribunal on 28.11.2005, however

M/S. SINGH ENTERPRISES vs. COMMNR.OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAMSHEDPUR&ORS

condone the delay beyond the permissible period provided under the Statute. The period upto which the prayer for condonation can be accepted

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE vs. M/S HONGO INDIA(P) LTD

condone the delay of 16 days in filing the Reference Application by the Commissioner under Section 35H(1) of the Central

RAJA MECHANICAL CO.(P) LTD. vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI-I

Appeal is dismissed on

Bench: The Adjudicating Authority/Assessing Authority. However, The Said Declaration Was Not Filed Within The Time Prescribed Under The ‘Central Excise Act, 1944 (For Short ‘The Act’) & The Rules Framed Thereunder. Accordingly, The Adjudicating Authority Had Issued A Show Cause Notice Dated 11.10.1995 To The Assessee, Inter Alia, Directing It To Show Cause As To Why The Modvat Credit To The Tune Of Rs.1,47,000/-, Availed By It, Should Not Be Disallowed & Recovered Under Rule 57G Of The Central Excise Rules, 1944 (For Short ‘The Rules’) Read With Section 11A Of The Act And, Further Directed It To Show Cause As To Why Penalty Under Rule 173Q Of The Rules Should Not Be Imposed. Thereafter, A Corrigendum Dated 23.4.1997 To The Show Cause Notice Was Issued To The Assessee, Inter Alia, Directing It To Show Cause To The Assistant 2

condonation of delay, before the adjudicating authority/assessing authority. However, the said declaration was not filed within the time prescribed under

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, KOLHAPUR vs. M/S CHAPHALKAR BROTHERS PUNE

The appeals are dismissed in terms of the signed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 61559/2017) C.A. No. 10450/2017 (III) (IA No.62911/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.62918/2017-EXEMPTION

THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF COOPERATION FOOD AND CONSUMER PROTECTION vs. A. KINGSTON DAVID

The appeals are disposed of in the above terms

Bench: The High Court. The Review Petition Was Dismissed On 31 January 2019. The Special Leave Petitions Were Filed On 28 March 2019. Hence, Sufficient Cause For Condoning The Delay Has Been Shown. The Delay In Filing The Special Leave Petitions Is Condoned. 2 Leave Granted. Digitally Signed By Chetan Kumar Date: 2021.12.16 16:29:46 Ist Reason: Signature Not Verified

condoning the delay has been shown. The delay in filing the Special Leave Petitions is condoned. 2 Leave granted. Digitally

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 14 vs. JASJIT SINGH

The appeals are dismissed in terms of signed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT

Delay condoned in SLP(C) Dy. No. 30718 of 2023 and all connected petitions. 2. Special leave granted. With the consent

M/S DALMIA POWER LTD. vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals are allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA

condonation of delay under Section 6 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with CBDT Circular No. 9/2015

INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (GWALIOR) M.P. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GWALIOR M.P

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE

condonation of delay in filing the application. 5. By order dated 13.04.1999, the CIT (Gwalior) condoned the delay and granted

COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, SHIMLA vs. M/S. AMBUJA DARLA KARSOG MANGU T.C.S.LTD

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

Bench: Us A Copy Of The Order Passed By A Bench Of This Court In Commr. Of Income Tax,Shimla Vs. M/S Sirmour Truck Operators Union, Gondpr \026 Civil Appeal No. 5845/2007 Stating As Under: " Delay Condoned. Leave Granted. M/S Gujarat Ambuja Cement Ltd. Entered Into A Contract With M/S Sirmour Truck Operators Union, The Respondent Herein. Respondent Assessee Is A Society. Its Members Consist Of Truck Operators. The Question Which Arose Before The High Court In The Income Tax Appeals Under Section 260A Was Whether Assessee Was Liable Or Not Liable To Deduct Tds Under Section 194 C Of The Income Tax Act. -1- In Our View, The Afore-Stated Question Is A Substantial Question Of Law. The High Court Ought To Have Decided The Said Question. It Ought Not To Have Dismissed The Appeals Summarily.

Delay condoned. Leave granted. When the matter was called out, learned Additional Solicitor General placed before us a copy of the order

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LIMITED

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Delay condoned. In view of the order dated 02.11.2017 passed by this Court in C.I.T., New Delhi Vs. M/s. Spice

INCOME TAX OFFICER,MUMBAI vs. VENKATESH PREMISES COOP.STY.LTD

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA

Delay condoned.  Leave granted in all the Special Leave Petitions.  2. A common question of law arises for consideration in this

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX-I,NEW DELHI vs. VATIKA TOWNSHIP P.LTD

Appeals of the assessees are allowed deleting the surcharge levied by the

Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted in all these matters. 3. In these batch of appeals, most of which are preferred

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S WOODWARD GOVERNOR INDIA P. LTD

Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted. 3. In this batch of civil appeals, the following question arises for determination: (i) Whether

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,NEW DELHI vs. M/S ELI LILLY & COMPANY (INDIA) P.LTD

Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted. 3. In this batch of civil appeals, the question which arises for determination is – whether

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S PEPSI FOODS LTD. (NOW PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.)

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

Delay condoned. Leave granted. 2. The appeals before us raise an important question as to the constitutional validity of the third

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS(EXPORT)NHAVASHEV vs. M/S.MASCOT INTERNATIONAL

The appeal is allowed in term of the signed judgment

CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING APPEAL. ON IA 1/2013 FOR STAY APPLICATION ON IA 2/2013) WITH C.A. No. 2407-2408/2014

M/S SARAL WIRE CRAFT PVT. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE & SERVICE TAX,

Delay condoned. Leave granted. The Appellant is aggrieved by the fact that the right of Appeal bestowed on the assessee