PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S ASIATIC OXYGEN LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITAT/12/2024HC CalcuttaWBCHCO000099202431 January 2024Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court found no acceptable explanation or sufficient cause for the inordinate delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, the court declined to exercise its discretion in favour of the revenue.

What were the facts?

The revenue filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging an ITAT order. There was a significant delay of 1503 days in filing the appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the delay in filing the appeal by the revenue should be condoned due to lack of sufficient cause.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

OD – 9 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax] ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/12/2024 IA NO: GA/1/2024, GA/2/2024

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA VS M/S ASIATIC OXYGEN LTD

BEFORE : THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM

And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA Date : 31st January, 2024

Appearance : Mr.Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ...for the appellant.

Mr.S.M. Surana, Adv. ...for the respondent.

The Court : This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenging the order dated 1st July, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A-Bench, Kolkata in ITA No.714/Kol/2017 for the assessment year 2011-12. There is a delay of 1503 days in filing the appeal. We have perused the affidavit filed in support of the condone delay application and we find that there is absolutely no explanation for the inordinate delay. Thus, in the absence of any acceptable explanation and in the absence of sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the period of

limitation, we are not persuaded to exercise any discretion in favour of the appellant/revenue. Accordingly, the application is dismissed and consequently, the appeal stands rejected.

(T.S. SIVAGNANAM)

(CHIEF JUSTICE)

(SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA, J.) S.Das/

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →