POWER FINANCE CORPO LTD vs. ADDL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 1097 / 2010HC Delhi13 August 20104 pages
For Petitioner: MAHUA KALRA
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court condoned the delay in filing the appeals. However, due to the lack of prior approval from the Committee on Disputes, the court was not inclined to interfere with the appeals in praesenti.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Power Finance Corp Ltd, filed several appeals before the High Court. The appeals were filed with a delay and the appellant had not yet obtained prior approval from the Committee on Disputes (COD).

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals could be entertained without prior approval from the Committee on Disputes. The High Court decided not to interfere with the appeals in the absence of such approval.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg)

1 to 4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

1.

ITA 1093/2010 +

> ..... Appellant POWER FINANCE CORP LTD Through: Ms. Mahua Kalra, Advocate.

ADDL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Anshul Sharma, Advocate for Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Advocate.

With

2.

ITA 1095/2010

> .... Appellant POWER FINANCE CORPO LTD Through: Ms. Mahua Kalra, Advocate.

ADDL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Anshul Sharma, Advocate for Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Advocate.

With

page 1 of 4.

![](_page_1_Picture_1.jpeg)

3.

ITA 1097/2010 +

> ..... Appellant POWER FINANCE CORPO LTD Through: Ms. Mahua Kalra, Advocate.

ADDL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Anshul Sharma, Advocate for Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Advocate.

And

4.

ITA 1125/2010

> .... Appellant POWER FINANCE CORP LTD Through: Ms. Mahua Kalra, Advocate.

ADDL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Anshul Sharma, Advocate for Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Advocate.

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

page 2 of 4.

![](_page_2_Picture_1.jpeg)

ORDER 13.08.2010

CM No. 14069/2010 in ITA No. 1097/2010 (exemption) CM No. 14102/2010 in ITA No. 1125/2010 (exemption)

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

Accordingly, applications stand disposed of.

CM No. 14066/2010 in ITA No. 1093/2010 CM Nos. 14070-71/2010 in ITA No.1097/2010

These are the applications for condonation of delay in filing and refiling of the appeals.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and regard being had to the assertions made in the applications, we find sufficient cause for condonation of delay and, accordingly, delay in filing and refilling the appeals is condoned.

Accordingly, applications stand disposed of.

ITA Nos. 1093/2010, 1095/2010, 1097/2010 and 1125/2010

Heard Ms. Mahua Kalra, learned counsel for the appellant.

It is submitted by Ms. Mahua Kalra, learned counsel for the appellant that prior approval from the Committee on Disputes (COD) has not yet been obtained.

page 3 of 4.

![](_page_3_Picture_1.jpeg)

In view of the aforesaid, we are not inclined to interfere with the appeals in praesenti. The appeals stand dismissed.

Needless to say, after obtaining the requisite approval from the Committee on Disputes, appellant can refile the appeals.

CHIEF JUSTICE

المسالم MANMOHAN, J

AUGUST 13, 2010 js

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →