COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. BRAMKUMAR DISC. FAMILY TRUST

PDF · subscribers

TAXAP/1575/2005HC GujaratGJHC24034969200526 June 2008Author: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE Y.R.MEENA,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA2 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the application for condonation of delay. The Tribunal found that the assessee was prosecuting a review application before the ITAT, which was a bona fide legal remedy. The time consumed in pursuing this remedy was considered a genuine reason for the delay in filing the Tax Appeal. The Court referred to its own decision in Jamadar Travels Through Partner Mehmood Pritamsinh Jamadar vs. Commissioner of Income Tax III, where it was held that filing a Miscellaneous Application for review could be considered bona fide litigation and a genuine reason for not approaching the appellate court in time. Therefore, sufficient cause was made out for explaining the delay. The delay was condoned, and the rule was made absolute, permitting the Tax Appeal to be filed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shanti Enterprises, filed a Civil Application (CA) No. 768 of 2021 before the High Court of Gujarat, seeking condonation of delay in filing a Tax Appeal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT order in ITA No. 3064/Ahd/2016 for Assessment Year 2011-2012 was pronounced on 27.02.2019 and received by the assessee on 05.03.2019. The limitation for filing the appeal expired on 03.07.2019. The assessee explained the delay by stating that they had filed a Miscellaneous Application (Misc. Application No. 37 of 2019) before the ITAT on 22.04.2019 seeking a review of the order. This review application was rejected by the ITAT on 15.12.2020, and the order was received by the assessee on 30.01.2021. The assessee claimed that prosecuting the review application constituted bona fide litigation and that the delay should be condoned.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 603 days (claimed as 250 days by the assessee) in filing the Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, can be condoned on the grounds of prosecuting a Miscellaneous Application for review before the ITAT. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that filing the Miscellaneous Application for review was a bona fide pursuit of another legal remedy. They contended that the time spent in prosecuting this review application should be considered, and the limitation period for filing the Tax Appeal should be reckoned from the date of receipt of the order on the Miscellaneous Application. They submitted that there was no delay in filing the Tax Appeal. Revenue's Contention: The revenue opposed the application for condonation of delay. However, they could not dispute the assessee's claim when the High Court referred to a similar case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

C/CA/768/2021 ORDER DATED: 11/10/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 768 of 2021 In F/TAX APPEAL NO. 6792 of 2021 ========================================================== SHANTI ENTERPRISES Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(2) ========================================================== Appearance: MR MANISH J SHAH(1320) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MRS KALPANAK RAVAL(1046) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA Date : 11/10/2022

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA) Heard learned advocate Mr. Manish Shah for the applicant and learned advocate Mr. Nikunt Raval for the respondent.

This application is filed praying to condone the delay of 603 days, which is claimed to be of 250 days by the applicant assesse. This delay has occurred at the end of appellant assessee in preferring appeal against judgment and order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 3064/Ahd/2016 for the Assessment Year 2011-2012. The order of the Tribunal was pronounced on 27.2.2019 and the same was stated to have been received on 5.3.2019. The limitation for filling the appeal expired on 3.7.2019. 3. The ground urged for explaining the delay was that against the said order of the Tribunal, the assessee had filed Misc. Application No. 37 of 2019 on 22.4.2019 seeking to review of the order. The Tribunal rejected the application on 15.12.2020 which order was received by the applicant on 30.01.2021. C/CA/768/2021 ORDER DATED: 11/10/2022

C.M. JOSHI

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →