Chief Postmaster General and Others v. Licving Media India Ltd.

348 ITR 76Supreme Court of India#9705 most cited

What is Chief Postmaster General and Others v. Licving Media India Ltd. authority for?

Delay in filing an appeal will not be condoned if the cause is attributable to negligence, want of bona fides, or inaction that could have been avoided with due care and attention.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2021.

Also referred to as

Chief Postmaster General v. Licving Media India Ltd. · delay in filing appeal · sufficient cause · reasonable cause · negligence · bonafide · inaction · condonation of delay · Supreme Court

Judgments citing Chief Postmaster General and Others v. Licving Media India Ltd.

Ram Niwas Agarwal, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(1), Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1921/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1911 To 1921/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2015-16 & 2015-16 Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…4-15 26Q:Q4 08-06-2015 08-01-2019 1280 days 7. The CIT(A) referred to decisions of Supreme Court in the case of Ramlal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 361 (SC) and the decision in the case of Chief Postmaster General and Others Vs. Licving Media India Ltd. 348 ITR 76 (SC) ;and Pundlik Jalam Patil (deceased) by LRs Vs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project (2008) 17 SCC 448 (SC) and observed that as per the law laid down in the aforesaid decisions, cause for the delay in filing the appeal which by due care and attention could have been avoided cannot be a sufficient cause and that if there is negligence, w…

Ram Niwas Agarwal, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1920/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1911 To 1921/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2015-16 & 2015-16 Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…4-15 26Q:Q4 08-06-2015 08-01-2019 1280 days 7. The CIT(A) referred to decisions of Supreme Court in the case of Ramlal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 361 (SC) and the decision in the case of Chief Postmaster General and Others Vs. Licving Media India Ltd. 348 ITR 76 (SC) ;and Pundlik Jalam Patil (deceased) by LRs Vs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project (2008) 17 SCC 448 (SC) and observed that as per the law laid down in the aforesaid decisions, cause for the delay in filing the appeal which by due care and attention could have been avoided cannot be a sufficient cause and that if there is negligence, w…

Ram Niwas Agarwal, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(1), Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1919/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1911 To 1921/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2015-16 & 2015-16 Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…4-15 26Q:Q4 08-06-2015 08-01-2019 1280 days 7. The CIT(A) referred to decisions of Supreme Court in the case of Ramlal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 361 (SC) and the decision in the case of Chief Postmaster General and Others Vs. Licving Media India Ltd. 348 ITR 76 (SC) ;and Pundlik Jalam Patil (deceased) by LRs Vs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project (2008) 17 SCC 448 (SC) and observed that as per the law laid down in the aforesaid decisions, cause for the delay in filing the appeal which by due care and attention could have been avoided cannot be a sufficient cause and that if there is negligence, w…

Ram Niwas Agarwal, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(1), Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1918/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1911 To 1921/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2015-16 & 2015-16 Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…4-15 26Q:Q4 08-06-2015 08-01-2019 1280 days 7. The CIT(A) referred to decisions of Supreme Court in the case of Ramlal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 361 (SC) and the decision in the case of Chief Postmaster General and Others Vs. Licving Media India Ltd. 348 ITR 76 (SC) ;and Pundlik Jalam Patil (deceased) by LRs Vs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project (2008) 17 SCC 448 (SC) and observed that as per the law laid down in the aforesaid decisions, cause for the delay in filing the appeal which by due care and attention could have been avoided cannot be a sufficient cause and that if there is negligence, w…

Ram Niwas Agarwal, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1917/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1911 To 1921/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2015-16 & 2015-16 Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…4-15 26Q:Q4 08-06-2015 08-01-2019 1280 days 7. The CIT(A) referred to decisions of Supreme Court in the case of Ramlal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 361 (SC) and the decision in the case of Chief Postmaster General and Others Vs. Licving Media India Ltd. 348 ITR 76 (SC) ;and Pundlik Jalam Patil (deceased) by LRs Vs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project (2008) 17 SCC 448 (SC) and observed that as per the law laid down in the aforesaid decisions, cause for the delay in filing the appeal which by due care and attention could have been avoided cannot be a sufficient cause and that if there is negligence, w…

Ram Niwas Agarwal, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(1), Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1916/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1911 To 1921/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2015-16 & 2015-16 Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…4-15 26Q:Q4 08-06-2015 08-01-2019 1280 days 7. The CIT(A) referred to decisions of Supreme Court in the case of Ramlal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 361 (SC) and the decision in the case of Chief Postmaster General and Others Vs. Licving Media India Ltd. 348 ITR 76 (SC) ;and Pundlik Jalam Patil (deceased) by LRs Vs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project (2008) 17 SCC 448 (SC) and observed that as per the law laid down in the aforesaid decisions, cause for the delay in filing the appeal which by due care and attention could have been avoided cannot be a sufficient cause and that if there is negligence, w…

Ram Niwas Agarwal, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1915/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1911 To 1921/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2015-16 & 2015-16 Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…4-15 26Q:Q4 08-06-2015 08-01-2019 1280 days 7. The CIT(A) referred to decisions of Supreme Court in the case of Ramlal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 361 (SC) and the decision in the case of Chief Postmaster General and Others Vs. Licving Media India Ltd. 348 ITR 76 (SC) ;and Pundlik Jalam Patil (deceased) by LRs Vs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project (2008) 17 SCC 448 (SC) and observed that as per the law laid down in the aforesaid decisions, cause for the delay in filing the appeal which by due care and attention could have been avoided cannot be a sufficient cause and that if there is negligence, w…

Ram Niwas Agarwal, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(1), Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1914/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1911 To 1921/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2015-16 & 2015-16 Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…4-15 26Q:Q4 08-06-2015 08-01-2019 1280 days 7. The CIT(A) referred to decisions of Supreme Court in the case of Ramlal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 361 (SC) and the decision in the case of Chief Postmaster General and Others Vs. Licving Media India Ltd. 348 ITR 76 (SC) ;and Pundlik Jalam Patil (deceased) by LRs Vs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project (2008) 17 SCC 448 (SC) and observed that as per the law laid down in the aforesaid decisions, cause for the delay in filing the appeal which by due care and attention could have been avoided cannot be a sufficient cause and that if there is negligence, w…

Ram Niwas Agarwal, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1913/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1911 To 1921/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2015-16 & 2015-16 Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…4-15 26Q:Q4 08-06-2015 08-01-2019 1280 days 7. The CIT(A) referred to decisions of Supreme Court in the case of Ramlal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 361 (SC) and the decision in the case of Chief Postmaster General and Others Vs. Licving Media India Ltd. 348 ITR 76 (SC) ;and Pundlik Jalam Patil (deceased) by LRs Vs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project (2008) 17 SCC 448 (SC) and observed that as per the law laid down in the aforesaid decisions, cause for the delay in filing the appeal which by due care and attention could have been avoided cannot be a sufficient cause and that if there is negligence, w…

Ram Niwas Agarwal, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1912/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1911 To 1921/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2015-16 & 2015-16 Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…4-15 26Q:Q4 08-06-2015 08-01-2019 1280 days 7. The CIT(A) referred to decisions of Supreme Court in the case of Ramlal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 361 (SC) and the decision in the case of Chief Postmaster General and Others Vs. Licving Media India Ltd. 348 ITR 76 (SC) ;and Pundlik Jalam Patil (deceased) by LRs Vs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project (2008) 17 SCC 448 (SC) and observed that as per the law laid down in the aforesaid decisions, cause for the delay in filing the appeal which by due care and attention could have been avoided cannot be a sufficient cause and that if there is negligence, w…

Ram Niwas Agarwal, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1911/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1911 To 1921/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2015-16 & 2015-16 Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

…4-15 26Q:Q4 08-06-2015 08-01-2019 1280 days 7. The CIT(A) referred to decisions of Supreme Court in the case of Ramlal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 361 (SC) and the decision in the case of Chief Postmaster General and Others Vs. Licving Media India Ltd. 348 ITR 76 (SC) ;and Pundlik Jalam Patil (deceased) by LRs Vs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project (2008) 17 SCC 448 (SC) and observed that as per the law laid down in the aforesaid decisions, cause for the delay in filing the appeal which by due care and attention could have been avoided cannot be a sufficient cause and that if there is negligence, w…

Chief Postmaster General and Others v. Licving Media India Ltd. (348 ITR 76) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax