PR. COMISSIONER OF INCOME TEX-2 vs. BECTON DICKINSON INDIA PVT. LTD.

There is an inordinate delay of 977 days in re-filing the appeal. 4. The Court finds that the standard excuse that the department is putting forth in all such applications for condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal is regarding the practice directions issued by the Court pertaining to filing of soft copies of the paper books in tax matters.

As regards this ground, sufficient advance notice had been given to the litigants and Advocates about the filing of soft copies of the paperbooks. Further, the Registry of the Court has made appropriate arrangements for scanning services at the filing counters to facilitate the making of soft copies so that the inconvenience, if any, caused to the Advocates and the litigants is minimised. In any event, the change could not have entailed a delay of more than two and half years.

Learned counsel for the Appellant pointed out a second reason, namely, the change in Standing counsel for the Department. This again does not impress the Court. It is not possible to accept that no one followed up on the filing of appeals and allowed a period of more than two and a half years to elapse before the appeal could be re-filed. The Department has a cell in the High Court which is under the supervision of a Deputy CIT. He ought to be keeping track of the filing of appeals and should be able to know if any appeal entrusted to the panel counsel for filing has not been listed even once before the Court for a long time. 7. The application bearing CM No.9650/2016 for condonation of the delay of 977 days in re-filing the appeal is dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.