HON’BLE SUPREME COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED NOTE
Commissioner of Income Tax II v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (erstwhile Maruti Udyog Ltd.)
SLP (Civil) Diary No. 54022 of 2026
Order dated 16 October 2026; Diary No. 54022/2026 ·
Income-tax litigation: filing-delay condonation; no substantive tax section specified in this SC order
Sources & disclosures includedDownload original judgment / order
2-judge bench · Dipankar Datta J. · Sheel Nagu J.
01 · Facts of the case
Revenue sought special leave against the Delhi High Court order dated 3 February 2025 in ITA 34/2014, with an application to condone 480 days of filing delay.
Source: Primary order: Caption and operative paragraphs 1–2; PDF page 1
02 · Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Court examined the application and found the cause shown for filing delay absolutely insufficient. Its reasoning concerned condonation, not the substantive tax dispute.
03 · Judicial decision
The delay-condonation application was rejected and the SLP dismissed as time-barred. Pending applications were disposed of.
04 · Outcome / in whose favour
Respondent on the procedural limitation outcome only.
05 · AKHB REVIEW POINT
Record filing dates and specific supporting evidence for a condonation application. Keep a dismissal for delay distinct from a merits judgment when citing the litigation outcome.
Source & verification
Download original judgment / order · Open cited source rendition
The complete one-page official record of proceedings was read. It identifies the Delhi High Court order dated 3 February 2025 in ITA 34/2014 and the 480-day filing delay. No assessment year is specified.
Statutory scope
Income-tax proceedings under the identified statutory setting. This note does not establish equivalence under the Income-tax Act, 2025, or comprehensive later-treatment/current-law clearance.
Later treatment
Source checked 2026-10-22. Subsequent treatment and current-law applicability have not been comprehensively checked.
Page references identify the supplied PDF; paragraph references identify the judgment unless stated otherwise.
AI disclosure & professional disclaimer
This AKHB research note was prepared with AI assistance from an identified primary report. Independent human review is not represented.
General legal and tax research only; not legal or tax advice. Verify the complete judgment, applicable statutory version and subsequent treatment before reliance. The AKHB REVIEW POINT is editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding. No current-law clearance is claimed.