PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 9 vs. M/S WORLD WINDOW IMPEX INDIA PVT. LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/519/2017HC DelhiDLHC01247676201714 July 2017Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court found the explanation for the delay insufficient, citing Supreme Court judgments that emphasize diligence from government departments. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay and the appeal were dismissed.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, filed an appeal with a delay of 235 days. The reasons provided for the delay were that the appeal had to be processed through official channels and was filed based on records maintained by the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the reasons provided by the appellant for the significant delay in filing the appeal were sufficient to warrant condonation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

N/A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

$~28. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +

ITA 519/2017

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 9 ..... Appellant

Through: Mr.Zoheb Hossain, Sr.Standing

Counsel

Versus

M/S WORLD WINDOW IMPEX INDIA PVT. LTD.

..... Respondent

Through: Mr.A.K.Babbar, Advocate with

Mr.Surinder Kumar, Mr.Bharat Tripathi, Mr.Atul

Babbar, Advocates.

CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

O R D E R %

14.07.2017 C.M.No.24333 /2017 (delay of 235 days in filing) 1. There is a delay of 235 days in filing the present appeal. In the present application for condonation of delay, the reasons furnished are as under: “3. That the Applicant/Appellant respectfully submits that there has been delay due to sufficient cause in spite of due procedure followed by the Applicant/Appellant in filing the said Appeal. The said delay in filing the appeal has arisen in bona fide circumstances and for no fault or omission or negligence on the part of the Applicant/Appellant herein and earnest efforts had been made by the Applicant/ Appellant to expedite the process at various stages of finalizing the accompanying Appeal, within the earliest possible time.

ITA 519/2017

Page 1 of 3.

4.

That the Appeal has been filed on the basis of records maintained in the office of concerned Assessing officer. The Appeal has to be processed through official channel/hierarchy and the Appeal has been filed by the Appellant as he is authorized to file Appeal under the Income Tax Act, 1961.”

2.

The Supreme Court in Postmaster General v. Living Media India Limited (2012) 3 SCC 563 observed as under:

“In our view, it is the right time to inform all the government bodies, their agencies and instrumentalities that unless they have reasonable and acceptable explanation for the delay and there was bonafide effort, there is no need to accept the usual explanation that the file was kept pending for process. The government departments are under a special obligation to ensure that they perform their duties with diligence and commitment. Condonation of delay is an exception and should not be used as an anticipated benefit for the Government Departments. The law shelters everyone under the same light and should not be swirled for the benefit of a few.”

3.

The above observation has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in State of U.P. v. Amar Nath Yadav (2014) 2 SCC 422.

4.

The above explanation offered by the Appellant is insufficient for the Court to be persuaded to condoned the delay.

ITA 519/2017

Page 2 of 3.

5.

The application is accordingly dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed.

S.MURALIDHAR, J

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J JULY 14, 2017/‘anb’

ITA 519/2017

Page 3 of 3.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →