Mahendra Dronkar vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax

MCC/713/2020HC Madhya Pradesh30 January 2024Author: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE2 pages

For Petitioner: Sudarshan Pandit

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the miscellaneous civil case. The court found no good ground to recall the order of dismissal of the Income Tax Appeal. The reasoning was based on the significant delay of 883 days in filing the restoration application, the absence of any application for condonation of this delay, and the petitioner's apparent lack of interest in prosecuting the matter. The court observed that even after the appeal was dismissed in 2017, it took the petitioner three years to file for restoration, and on the day of hearing, no interest was shown. Therefore, the petition was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mahendra Dronkar, filed a miscellaneous civil case seeking the restoration of Income Tax Appeal No. 56 of 2016. This appeal had been dismissed for non-compliance with a peremptory order dated July 12, 2017. The restoration application was filed with a delay of 883 days. The petitioner's counsel stated they had no instructions. The High Court noted the petitioner's apparent lack of interest in prosecuting the matter, citing the significant delay in filing the restoration application after the initial dismissal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 883 days in filing the restoration application should be condoned, considering the absence of a formal application for condonation and the petitioner's lack of interest in prosecuting the matter. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner's counsel stated they had no instructions, implying a potential lack of active participation or a desire to proceed. However, no specific arguments were made to justify the delay or seek condonation. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue. The court's decision appears to be based on the petitioner's conduct and lack of interest.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA ON THE 30th OF JANUARY, 2024 MISC. CIVIL CASE No. 713 of 2020 BETWEEN:- MAHENDRA DRONKAR S/O K.L. DRONKAR R/O G-37, CHETAK CHAMBER, 14 R.N.T. MARG, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH) .....PETITIONER (BY SHRI SUDARSHAN PANDIT - ADVOCATE) AND 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INCOME TAX OFFICE, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH) 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL -I) INCOME TAX OFFICE, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH) 3. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO. 1(1) , INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH) .....RESPONDENTS This application coming on for hearing this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravi Malimath, Chief Justice passed the following:

ORDER This petition is filed seeking for restoration of Income Tax Appeal No.56 o f 2016, which was dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 12/7/2017. 1 (RAVI MALIMATH) CHIEF JUSTICE (VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE

There is a delay of 883 days in filing the restoration application. There is no application for condonation of delay. Counsel for the petitioner submits that he has no instruction also.

It is apparent that the petitioner is not interested to prosecute this matter. Even after the dismissal in the year 2017, he has taken 3 years to file restoration application and today also he is not showing any interest.

Hence,for all these reasons, we find no good ground to recall the order. The petition is dismissed. PK

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →