PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2 vs. M/S HAVELLS INDIA LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 383 / 2023HC Delhi13 September 20232 pages
For Petitioner: SANJAY KUMAR
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the applications for condonation of delay. The respondent's counsel did not oppose the prayers made by the appellant.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, filed applications seeking condonation of delay in re-filing two appeals. The delay was 180 days in one appeal and 210 days in the other.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the delay in re-filing the appeals should be condoned by the High Court.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~12 & 15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 102/2023

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2

..... Appellant Through: Mr Sanjay Kumar, Ms Easha and Ms Hemlata Rawat, Advocates.

versus

HAVELLS INDIA LTD.

..... Respondent Through: Mr Paritosh Jain, Mr Diyansh Jain and Mr R. Madhav Bora, Advocates.

+ ITA 383/2023

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2

..... Appellant Through: Mr Sanjay Kumar, Ms Easha and Ms Hemlata Rawat, Advocates.

versus

M/S HAVELLS INDIA LTD.

..... Respondent Through: Mr Paritosh Jain, Mr Diyansh Jain and Mr R. Madhav Bora, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

O R D E R %

13.09.2023

[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] C.M. No. 7866/2023 in ITA 102/2023 C.M. No. 36164/2023 in ITA 383/2023 1. These applications have been moved on behalf of the appellant/revenue seeking condonation of delay. 2. According to the appellant/revenue, there is a delay of 180 days (in ITA 102/2023) and 210 days (in ITA 383/2023) in re-filing the appeals. ITA 102/2023 & 383/2023

Page 1 of 2 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 13:32:33

2.1 Learned counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondent, does not oppose the prayers made in the applications. 3. Accordingly, The prayers made in the applications are allowed. The delay is condoned. 4. The applications are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. ITA 102/2023 ITA 383/2023 5. Although the report of the Registry is that process fee was not filed, Mr Paritosh Jain, Advocate, enters appearance on behalf of the respondent/assessee. 6. Mr Jain will ensure that objections qua vakalatnama filed by him are removed and the same is brought on record. 7. List the matters on 08.04.2024.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J SEPTEMBER 13, 2023/ MS

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

ITA 102/2023 & 383/2023

Page2 of 2 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 13:32:33

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →