Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project

17 SCC 448Supreme Court of India2008#1389 most cited

What is Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project authority for?

The Supreme Court emphasizes that courts assist only those who are vigilant and do not slumber over their rights, establishing a stricter approach against condoning significant or unexplained delays in filing appeals.

82

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Pundlik Jalam Patil · condonation of delay · delay in filing appeal · Section 5 Limitation Act · Section 253(5) · vigilance · sufficient cause · appellate proceedings · unexplained delay · slumber over rights

Sections most often in play

Section 253(5)Section 147Section 1961Section 250Section 143(1)Section 5 of the Limitation ActSection 143(3)Section 144

Issues it is cited on

section 256section 66short deduction of tdssection 253(5)section 253(3)bona fide mistakesection 80p(2)(c)delay in filing appealsection 249(3)section 200a(1)section 249(2)credit for tds

Judgments citing Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project

S. S. Rangasamy Raja, Rajapalayam vs. ITO, TDS Ward, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1743/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1743 & 1744/Chny/2025 िनधा>रण वष> /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 200A

…nner informed by reason. Whims or fancies; prejudices or predilections cannot and should not form the basis of exercising discretionary powers.” 32. In the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil (D) by LRs. v. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project & others, (2008) 17 SCC 448, this Court held as follows: “19. In Ajit Singh Thakur Singh v. State of Gujarat [(1981) 1 SCC 495 : 1981 SCC (Cri) 184] this Court observed: (SCC p. 497, para 6) “6. … it is true that a party is entitled to wait until the last day of limitation for filing an appeal. But when it allows limitation to expire and pleads sufficient cause for not fili…

Soleone Tradelinks Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 603/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Malarkodi R., Sr. DR
Section 144

…e Tradelinks Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year –2018-19 - 4– 520 days in filing special leave petition cannot be condoned without satisfactory explanation and hence, dismissed. In the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project [2008] 17 SCC 448 (Para 6), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made the following observations in this regard: “13. Whether the respondent had satisfied the court that it had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeals within the prescribed time? Section 5 of the Limitation Act provides for extension of prescribed period of limitation in certain cases and confers j…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Saiyedpura Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer TDS CPC, CPC

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 855/SRT/2024[2016-201]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025AY 2016-201

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…2.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd. 08.04.2024, it has been held that condonation of delay should not be granted only on the ground that ordinarily…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officxer, TDS, CPC

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 818/SRT/2024[A.Y. 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…2.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd. 08.04.2024, it has been held that condonation of delay should not be granted only on the ground that ordinarily…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, TDS, CPC

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 816/SRT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…2.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd. 08.04.2024, it has been held that condonation of delay should not be granted only on the ground that ordinarily…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Altret House, Saiyedpura vs. The Income Tax Officer, TDS, CPC, Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 815/SRT/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…2.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd. 08.04.2024, it has been held that condonation of delay should not be granted only on the ground that ordinarily…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, TDS, CPC, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 814/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…2.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd. 08.04.2024, it has been held that condonation of delay should not be granted only on the ground that ordinarily…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, TDS, CPC, Surat

ITA 812/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing) Si. No.

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…2.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated 08.04.2024, it has been held that condonation of delay should not be granted only on the ground that ordinarily a litigant does not stand to…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, TDS, CPC, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 811/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing) Si. No.

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…2.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated 08.04.2024, it has been held that condonation of delay should not be granted only on the ground that ordinarily a litigant does not stand to…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, TDS, CPC, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 810/SRT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…2.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd. 08.04.2024, it has been held that condonation of delay should not be granted only on the ground that ordinarily…

Runi Impex, Surat vs. DCIT Circle 3(2), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 96/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Satish Mody, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra Sindhu, CIT DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

…328 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that delay of 520 days in filing special leave petition cannot be condoned without satisfactory explanation and hence, dismissed. In the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project [2008] 17 SCC 448 (Para 6), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made the following observations in this regard: “13. Whether the respondent had satisfied the court that it had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeals within the prescribed time? ITA Nos. 221/Srt/2024 & 96/Srt/2025 Runi Impex vs. DCIT Asst. Year –2012-13 - 5– Section 5 of the Limitation Act provi…

Runi Impex, Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 3(2), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 221/SRT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Satish Mody, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra Sindhu, CIT DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

…328 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that delay of 520 days in filing special leave petition cannot be condoned without satisfactory explanation and hence, dismissed. In the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project [2008] 17 SCC 448 (Para 6), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made the following observations in this regard: “13. Whether the respondent had satisfied the court that it had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeals within the prescribed time? ITA Nos. 221/Srt/2024 & 96/Srt/2025 Runi Impex vs. DCIT Asst. Year –2012-13 - 5– Section 5 of the Limitation Act provi…

Mogar Partapore Vibhag Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd, Na vs. Arivs.DCIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 91/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)Section 8O

…328 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that delay of 520 days in filing special leave petition cannot be condoned without satisfactory explanation and hence, dismissed. In the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project [2008] 17 SCC 448 (Para 6), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made the following observations in this regard: “13. Whether the respondent had satisfied the court that it had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeals within the prescribed time? Section 5 of the Limitation Act provides for extension of prescribed period of limitation in certain cases and confers j…

Navagam Vibhag Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd, Na vs. Arivs.ITO, Ward-3, Navsari

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 89/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)Section 8O

…328 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that delay of 520 days in filing special leave petition cannot be condoned without satisfactory explanation and hence, dismissed. In the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project [2008] 17 SCC 448 (Para 6), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made the following observations in this regard: “13. Whether the respondent had satisfied the court that it had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeals within the prescribed time? Section 5 of the Limitation Act provides for extension of prescribed period of limitation in certain cases and confers j…

Navagam Vibhag Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd, Na vs. Arivs.Income Tax Officer, Ward 3, Navsari

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 88/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)Section 8O

…328 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that delay of 520 days in filing special leave petition cannot be condoned without satisfactory explanation and hence, dismissed. In the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project [2008] 17 SCC 448 (Para 6), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made the following observations in this regard: “13. Whether the respondent had satisfied the court that it had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeals within the prescribed time? Section 5 of the Limitation Act provides for extension of prescribed period of limitation in certain cases and confers j…

Navagam Vibhag Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd, Na vs. Arivs.ITO, Ward 3, Navsari

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 87/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)Section 8O

…328 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that delay of 520 days in filing special leave petition cannot be condoned without satisfactory explanation and hence, dismissed. In the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project [2008] 17 SCC 448 (Para 6), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made the following observations in this regard: “13. Whether the respondent had satisfied the court that it had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeals within the prescribed time? Section 5 of the Limitation Act provides for extension of prescribed period of limitation in certain cases and confers j…

Navagam Vibhag Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd., Na vs. Arivs.ITO, Ward 3, Navsari

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 86/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)Section 8O

…328 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that delay of 520 days in filing special leave petition cannot be condoned without satisfactory explanation and hence, dismissed. In the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project [2008] 17 SCC 448 (Para 6), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made the following observations in this regard: “13. Whether the respondent had satisfied the court that it had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeals within the prescribed time? Section 5 of the Limitation Act provides for extension of prescribed period of limitation in certain cases and confers j…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 6, New Delhi vs. Nec Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 7392/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…aff Assn. Popat & Kotecha Property v. SBI Staff Assn., (2005) 7 SCC 510), Rajender Singh v. Santa Singh | Rajender Singh v. Santa Singh, (1973) 2 SCC 705] and Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Jalgaon Medium Project [Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448: (2009) 5 SCC (Civ) 9071) 14. In P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka [P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka, (2002) 4 SCC 578: 2002 SCC (Cri) 830] this Court held that judicially engrafting principles of limitation amounts to legislating and would fly in the face of law laid down by the Constitution Bench in Abdul Rehman Antulay v. R.S. N…

Punalveli Weavers Cooperative Society, Punalveli vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3, Virudhunagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1244/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1244/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Punalveli Weavers Cooperative Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Society, No. 6/9, T. Vinayagar Kovil Ward 3, Street, Punalveli 626 111, Virudhunagar. Virudhunagar District. [Pan:Aaaap3467B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.02.2025 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-2, Guwahati For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee A Registered Co- Operative Society Engaged In Activities Classified Under The Definition Of “Weavers Society” As Per Section 2(31) Of The Tamil Nadu Co-Operative Societies Act,1983. The Assessee Filed Return Of Income On 07.10.2018

For Appellant: Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 2(31)Section 3Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एस.एस. िव"ने" रिव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम" । Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Jagadish, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1244/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Punalveli Weavers Cooperative Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Society, No. 6/9, T. Vinayagar Kovil Ward 3, Street, Punalveli 626 111, Virudhunagar. Virudhunagar District. [PAN:AAAAP3467B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Res…

The Aroor Central Service Co-Operative Bank Limited, Alappuzha vs. ITO, Ward -2, Alappuzha

In the result, the appeals and stay applications filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 372/COCH/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar Varma, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80ASection 80P

…k Ltd. the High Court would stand rejected and the Miscellaneous First Appeal shall stand dismissed as barred by time. No costs." 10. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pundlilk Jalam Patil (dead) by LRs vs Executive Engineer Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448, held that basically the laws of limitation are founded on public policy and the courts have expressed at least three different reasons supporting the existence of statutes of limitation, namely (i) that long dormant claims have more of cruelty than justice in them, (ii) that a defendant might have lost the evidence to dispute the stated claim, an…