COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- VI. vs. TURNER INTERNATIONAL INDIA PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/951/2016HC DelhiDLHC01170952201630 January 2017Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the reasons provided by the Revenue for the inordinate delay of 1044 days in filing the appeals were "not only unconvincing but utterly untenable." The court found that the pendency of a large number of appeals, administrative difficulties due to manpower inadequacy, and changes in the panel of counsel do not constitute "sufficient causes" to persuade the court to condone such a significant delay. Consequently, the applications for condonation of delay were dismissed. In view of the dismissal of the condonation applications, the appeals themselves were dismissed. The judgment did not decide any issues on the merits of the appeals.

What were the facts?

The appeals before the High Court of Delhi were filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax- VI (the Revenue) against Turner International India Pvt. Ltd. (the Assessee). The appeals were filed for assessment years not specified in the judgment. The appeals were significantly delayed by 1044 days. The Revenue sought condonation of this delay, citing reasons such as a large number of pending appeals, administrative difficulties due to manpower inadequacy, and changes in the panel of its counsel. The High Court considered these explanations as part of the applications for condonation of delay.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 1044 days in filing the appeals is attributable to "sufficient cause" warranting condonation by the High Court, as per the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue contended that the delay was caused by a large number of pending appeals, administrative difficulties due to manpower inadequacy, and changes in the panel of its counsel. The Revenue argued that these circumstances constituted sufficient cause for the delay. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the Assessee regarding the delay or the merits of the appeals.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~5 & 6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 950/2016, C.M. APPL.48245-48246/2016 + ITA 951/2016, C.M. APPL.48247/2016

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- VI. ..... Appellant

versus

TURNER INTERNATIONAL INDIA PVT. LTD...... Respondent Through : Sh. Dileep Shivpuri, Sr. Standing Counsel with Sh. Sanjay Kumar and Sh. Vikrant. A. Maheshwari, Advocate, for appellant, in Item Nos. 5 and 6. Sh. Mayank Nagi and Sh. Tarun Singh, Advocates, for respondent, in Item Nos. 5 and 6.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

O R D E R %

30.01.2017

C.M. APPL.48246/2016 IN ITA 950/2016 C.M. APPL.48247/2016 IN ITA 951/2016,

Both the appeals are inordinately delayed by 1044 days. The Revenue’s explanation, as part of its application for condonation of delay is not only unconvincing but utterly untenable. It states that the pendency of a large number of appeals, administrative difficulties by reason of manpower inadequancy and the changes in the panel of its counsel led to the delay in refiling. These are not “sufficient causes” to persuade the Court to condone the delay. The applications are accordingly dismissed.

Page 1 of 2

ITA 950/2016, C.M. APPL.48245/2016 ITA 951/2016

In view of the orders made in C.M.Appl.48246/2016 (in ITA 950/2016) and C.M. Appl.48247/2016 (in ITA 951/2016), the appeals are dismissed.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

NAJMI WAZIRI, J JANUARY 30, 2017/ajk

Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →