PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5,KOLKATA vs. SHRI MANOJ KUMAR DHUPELIA
What did the High Court hold?
The Tribunal rejected the delay condonation application as the explanation for a significant portion of the delay was found to be insufficient. Consequently, the appeal filed by the department was dismissed.
What were the facts?
The Income Tax Department filed an appeal beyond the prescribed limitation period by 594 days. The delay condonation application cited the Supreme Court's suo motu order regarding extension of limitation due to the pandemic.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was whether the delay in filing the appeal could be condoned based on the explanations provided by the appellant, particularly concerning the Supreme Court's suo motu order and internal processing delays.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
ORDER OD – 5 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/188/2022 IA NO: GA/1/2022 GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – 5, KOLKATA VERSUS SHRI MANOJ KUMAR DHUPELIA BEFORE: The Hon'ble Justice SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI The Hon'ble Justice RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ Date : 4th December 2023. Appearance: Mr. Tilak Mitra, Advocate … for appellant. Ms. Debashri Mukherjee, Advocate … for respondent. Order on delay condonation application [IA GA No.1 of 2022] 1. Heard learned senior standing counsel for the Income Tax Department / appellant as applicant and learned counsel for the respondent/assessee on delay condonation application being IA GA No.1 of 2022. 2. This appeal has been filed beyond limitation by 594 days with delay condonation application. As per the aforesaid delay condonation application, the impugned order is dated 15.06.2020 which was received
2 on 09.09.2020 and the appeal was filed on 24.08.2022 i.e. beyond limitation by 594 days. 3. Apart from other explanations, the appellant/applicant has offered explanation in paragraph 10 of the application that the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 is liable to be condoned in view of the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No.3 of 2020 in Re: cognizance for extension of limitation with miscellaneous Application No.29 of 2022 in Miscellaneous Application No.665 of 2021 in Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No.3 of 2020.
Thus, according to the appellant/applicant, the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 is liable to be excluded for the purposes of limitation. For the rest of the period, the appellant/applicant has offered explanation in paragraph 13 of the application as under:- “13. The soft copies of appeal documents drafted by the Learned Advocate and forwarded by the Jr. Central Govt. Advocate, Ministry of Law and Justice were forwarded to the Assessing officer on 09.02.2022 for vetting and corrections and submitting the same through the office of the Range Head to the office of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-5, Kolkata. The vetted documents were received in the office of the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-5, Kolkata on 18.08.2022.” 4. No explanation has been offered by the appellant/applicant for delay for the period from 09.02.2022 to 18.08.2022 except in paragraph 13 afore-
3 quoted. Thus, no explanation for delay in filing the appeal for the period from 28.02.2022 to 18.08.2022 has been offered by the appellant/applicant. 5. Under such circumstances, in the absence of any explanation for delay for about 6 months, the delay cannot be condoned. Consequently, the delay condonation application being IA GA No.1 of 2022 deserves to be rejected and is hereby rejected. Order on Appeal 6. In view of rejection of the delay condonation application being IA GA No.1 of 2022, the appeal also stands dismissed. 7. All pending applications stand disposed of. (SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI, J.) (RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ, J.) S. Kumar
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026