THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), AHMEDABAD vs. LAVJIBHAI SWARUPCHAND MEHTA

PDF · subscribers
SCA/13024/2020HC GujaratGJHC24046038202022 October 2020Author: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal rejected the Department's application under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as being beyond the prescribed period of limitation. The High Court found no infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Department could not show that the application was within time. Therefore, the High Court held that the petition lacked merit. The operative direction was the dismissal of the petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ahmedabad, filed an application before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ITAT rejected this application on the grounds that it was filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation, which is six months from the end of the month in which the original order was passed. The Department's appeal challenges this rejection by the ITAT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in rejecting the Department's application filed under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the ground of limitation? Assessee (Revenue) Contentions: The Department argued that its application under Section 254(2) was maintainable. However, the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the petitioner (Department) was unable to demonstrate that the application was filed within the prescribed period of limitation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 254(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
C/SCA/13024/2020 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13024 of 2020 ========================================================== THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), AHMEDABAD Versus LAVJIBHAI SWARUPCHAND MEHTA ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIKRAM NATH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA Date : 22/10/2020

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIKRAM NATH)

We have heard Ms. Mauna Bhatt, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the petitioner.

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal rejected the application filed by the Department under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the finding that the same was beyond prescribed period of limitation, i.e. beyond six months from the end of the month in which the order was passed.

Ms. Bhatt has not been able to show that the application was within time and not beyond the time. C/SCA/13024/2020 ORDER

In that view of the matter, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal. The petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. (VIKRAM NATH, CJ) (J. B. PARDIWALA, J) A. B. VAGHELA/A.M.PIRZADA

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →