DINESH KUMAR GOYAL, HUF vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,(INVESTIGATION)-2, KOLKATA, AND ANR

WPO/102/2021HC CalcuttaWBCHCO000489202116 March 2021Author: HON'BLE JUSTICE SHEKHAR B. SARAF2 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the revenue's application for condonation of delay. The Court found that the revenue would not be entitled to the benefit of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Furthermore, the affidavit filed in support of the application did not provide any reasons, let alone satisfactory reasons, to condone the inordinate delay of 614 days. Consequently, the appeal filed by the revenue was rejected. The connected stay application was also closed as a result of the dismissal of the appeal. The ratio decidendi is that an inordinate delay without satisfactory reasons cannot be condoned, even if there is a general extension order from the Supreme Court, if the facts do not warrant its application.

What were the facts?

The revenue, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-18, Kolkata, filed an appeal before the High Court at Calcutta against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) on June 26, 2019. The certified copy of the ITAT's order was received by the Department on July 25, 2019. The appeal was presented on July 28, 2021, resulting in a delay of 614 days. The revenue filed an application (GA No.1/2021) seeking condonation of this delay, seeking to rely on an order from the Hon'ble Supreme Court that extended the period of limitation. A connected stay application (GA No.2/2021) was also filed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the revenue is entitled to the benefit of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court extending the period of limitation, thereby condoning the delay of 614 days in filing the appeal against the ITAT's order dated June 26, 2019. Assessee's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the assessee (Punam Parsramka) regarding the condonation of delay. Revenue's arguments: The revenue contended that they are entitled to the benefit of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court extending the period of limitation. They also filed an affidavit in support of their application for condonation of delay, presumably to provide reasons for the delay.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

OD-5 & 6 ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE IA NO. GA/1/2021 In ITAT/102/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-18, KOLKATA Vs PUNAM PARSURAMKA & IA NO. GA/2/2021 In ITAT/102/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-18, KOLKATA Vs PUNAM PARSURAMKA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM And The Hon’ble JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 25TH MARCH, 2022. Appearance: Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. …For the Appellant Mr. Subhas Agarwal, Adv. …For the Respondent GA No.1/2021 The Court : This application has been filed by the revenue to condone the delay of 614 days in filing the appeal. The Tribunal passed the order on 26th

2 June, 2019, certified copy of which was received by the Department on 25th July, 2019. The appeal was presented on 28th July, 2021. The revenue seeks to take umbrage under the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court extending the period of limitation. From the dates noted above, the revenue will not be entitled to the benefit of the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Furthermore, from the affidavit filed in support of the application for condonation of delay, we find no reasons, much less satisfactory reasons, to condone the inordinate delay of 614 days. Therefore, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed and consequently, the appeal is rejected. With the dismissal of the appeal, the connected stay application being GA No.2/2021 stands closed. (T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) S.De/SN

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →