DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTION) vs. INDIAN INSTITUTE OF FOREIGN TRADE
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the reasons provided by the appellant for the delay of 1245 days were insufficient to constitute a sufficient cause for condonation. The court found the explanation regarding the re-organization of counsel and the pendency of defective appeals to be unsatisfactory. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay and the appeal itself were dismissed. The court did not decide on the merits of the appeal as it was dismissed on procedural grounds. No specific ratio decidendi for future cases was established beyond the standard for condoning delays in filing appeals.
What were the facts?
The Director of Income Tax (Exemption), the appellant, filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal was filed on 04.09.2013, but it was significantly belated by 1245 days. The appellant cited the re-organization of its panel of counsel and the pendency of a large number of defective appeals as reasons for the delay. The respondent, Indian Institute of Foreign Trade, was not represented. The High Court was considering an application for condonation of delay along with the appeal.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the delay of 1245 days in filing the appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is liable to be condoned. (Question of law) The appellant contended that the delay was attributable to administrative reasons, specifically the re-organization of their panel of counsel and the large number of defective appeals pending. They argued that these circumstances constituted sufficient cause for the delay. The respondent did not appear before the High Court, and therefore, no arguments were recorded on their behalf.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +
ITA 193/2017, CM APPL.9068/2017
DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocate.
versus
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF FOREIGN TRADE ..... Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
O R D E R %
27.03.2017
The present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act is highly belated - by 1245 days. There is hardly any explanation for the delay. The appeal was filed on 04.09.2013 but appears to have been kept objected to. The Income Tax Department does not seem to have any clue about the filing of the appeal or the objections raised by the registry. It refers to the re-organisation of its panel of counsel and cites the pendency of a large number of appeals marked as defective. The reasons can hardly be considered sufficient cause to condone the delay.
The application and the appeal are accordingly dismissed.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J
NAJMI WAZIRI, J MARCH 27, 2017 /vikas/
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
