VIKAS JOSHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

ITA - 538 / 2024HC Delhi22 October 20242 pages

For Petitioner: RAVI RAI

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court condoned the delay of 170 days in filing the appeal. The Court allowed the application for condonation of delay, subject to all just exceptions. The reasoning provided is that the application for condonation was allowed for the reasons mentioned therein. The High Court issued notice to the respondent (Revenue), who accepted notice and sought time to take instructions. The appeal was listed for further hearing. The finding on the substantive issues of the appeal, if any, is not addressed in this procedural order.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by Vikas Joshi (the appellant) against an order passed by the Income Tax Officer (the respondent). The appeal pertains to an assessment year not explicitly stated in the provided text. The appellant sought condonation for a delay of 170 days in filing the present appeal, which was granted by the High Court. The Revenue's counsel accepted notice and sought time to take instructions. The matter was listed for further hearing on 24.10.2024. The specific order or action under challenge and the amount in dispute are not detailed in this excerpt.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should condone the delay of 170 days in filing the appeal, turning on the principles of justice and equity. The appellant argued for condonation based on reasons provided in their application, seeking to have their appeal heard on merits. The Revenue did not raise any specific arguments against condonation in this excerpt but accepted notice and sought time to take instructions, implying they would present their case later. No specific IT Act provisions were explicitly named in relation to the condonation of delay in this part of the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~74 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 538/2024 CM APPL. 62092/2024

VIKAS JOSHI

.....Appellant Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Mishika Pandita, Mohd. Changez Ali Khan and Mr. Shekhar Kumar, Advocates

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Ashvini Kr. and Mr. Rishabh Nangia, Jr. Standing Counsels for Income Tax Department.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

O R D E R %

22.10.2024 CM APPL. 62093/2024 (exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. Application stands disposed of. CM APPL. 62094/2024 3. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same stands allowed. 4. The delay of 170 days in filing the present appeal stands condoned. 5. The application is disposed of accordingly. ITA 538/2024 6. Issue notice. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 12:04:34

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of Revenue accepts notice and seeks time to take instructions. 8. List on 24.10.2024.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J OCTOBER 22, 2024 zp

Click here to check corrigendum, if any This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 12:04:34

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →