COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-I vs. M/S BHUSHAN STEEL LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/262/2017HC DelhiDLHC01113204201702 May 2017Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the application for condonation of delay. The Court found the excuse provided by the department regarding the practice directions for filing soft copies of paperbooks to be insufficient to justify a delay of over three years. The Court noted that adequate notice was given and scanning facilities were provided. It was deemed unacceptable that no follow-up was done by the department, which has a dedicated cell to monitor appeal filings. Consequently, the appeal itself was dismissed due to the failure to re-file it within a reasonable time. No specific issue regarding the merits of the original ITAT order was decided.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-I, the appellant, filed an appeal before the High Court of Delhi against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal was re-filed with an inordinate delay of 1182 days. The appellant sought condonation of this delay. The respondent is Bhushan Steel Ltd. The assessment years are not specified. The core issue revolves around the delay in re-filing the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 1182 days in re-filing the appeal should be condoned by the High Court? Assessee's contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee (Bhushan Steel Ltd.) regarding the delay. Revenue's contentions: The appellant (Commissioner of Income Tax) attributed the delay to the practice directions issued by the Court pertaining to the filing of soft copies of paperbooks in tax matters. The appellant argued that sufficient advance notice was given and arrangements were made for scanning services to minimize inconvenience. The appellant also stated that the change in procedure could not have entailed a delay of more than three years and that the Department has a cell in the High Court under a Deputy CIT to track filings.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 262/2017 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-I..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar & Mr. Dileep Shivpuri, Advocates versus BHUSHAN STEEL LTD. ..... Respondent Through CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR O R D E R % 02.05.2017 CM No.12611/2017(delay of 1182 in re-filing appeal) 1. There is an inordinate delay of 1182 days in re-filing the appeal. 2. The Court finds that the standard excuse that the department is putting forth in all such applications for condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal is regarding the practice directions issued by the Court pertaining to filing of soft copies of the paperbooks in tax matters. 3. As regards this ground, sufficient advance notice had been given to the litigants and Advocates about the filing of soft copies of the paperbooks. Further, the Registry of the Court had made appropriate arrangements for scanning services at the filing counters to facilitate the making of soft copies ITA No.262 of 2017 Page 1 of 2

so that the inconvenience if any caused to the Advocates and the litigants is minimised. In any event the change could not have entailed a delay of more than three years. 4. It is not possible to accept that no one followed up on the filing of appeals and allowed a period of more than three years to elapse before the appeal could be re-filed. The Department has a cell in the High Court which is under the supervision of a Deputy CIT. He ought to be keeping track of the filing of appeals and should be able to know if any appeal entrusted to the panel counsel for filing has not been listed even once before the Court for a long time. 5. The application bearing CM No. 12611/2017 for condonation of the delay of 1182 days in re-filing the appeal is dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. S.MURALIDHAR, J CHANDER SHEKHAR, J MAY 02, 2017 tp ITA No.262 of 2017 Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →