Vedabhai v. Santaram

Estate of Late Sunderlal C. Parikh, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT CPC Bangalore, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2011-12 Estate Of Late Sunderlal C. Acit-Cpc-Bangalore, Parikh, Income Tax Officer-26(1)(4), बनाम/ Vrindavan, 33, Hatkesh Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Vs. Society, C-10, Bkc, Bandra, 5Th N.S. Road, Jvpd, Mumbai-400050 Vile Parle (West), Mumbai-400056 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.Aaaae1766G "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Ms Neha Paranjape-Ar Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Estate Of Late Sunderlal C. Parikh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 30/01/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 30/01/2018

…rs instituted in this court. But the message does not appear to have percolated down to all the others courts in the hierarchy.” 2.3. Furthermore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vedabai Alia Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil vs. Shantaram Baburao Patil 253 ITR 798 (SC) held that the court has to exercise the discretion on the facts of each case keeping in mind that in construing the expression Estate of Late Sunderlal C. Parikh ‘sufficient cause’, the principle of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance. The court held that the expression “sufficient cause” should receive liberal constructi…

Kiran Gulab Bhatia, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Range-24(2)(3), Mumbai

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

…ner, which sub- serves the end of justice- that being the life purpose of the existence of the institution of the courts. When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each preferred. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Vedabhai vs Santaram 253 ITR 798 observed that inordinate delay calls of cautious approach. This means that there should be no malafide or dilatory tactics. Sufficient cause should receive liberal construction to advance substantial justice. The Hon’ble Apex Court in 167 ITR 471 observed as under:- “3. The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting sect…

Mayur Shrimankar, Mumbai vs. ITO-21(1)(3), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…g the life purpose of the existence of the institution of the courts. When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Vedabhai vs Santaram 253 ITR 798 observed that inordinate delay calls of cautious approach. This means that there should be no malafide or dilatory tactics. Sufficient cause should receive liberal construction to advance substantial justice. The Hon’ble Apex Court in 167 ITR 471 observed as under:- “3. The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting sec…

ITO 31(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Bharatkumar Nagraj Jain, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Years: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-31(2)(3), Mr. Bharatkumar Nagraj (Erstwhile Income Tax Officer- Jain, बनाम/ 24(3)(4), Proprietor Of N.R. Vs. R. No.705, C-11, 7Th Floor, Computech, 23/11, Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Jawahar Nagar, B.K.C. Bandra (East), Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400063 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Acwpj1720C C.O. No.07/Mum/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita No.2608/Mum/2015) Assessment Years: 2009-10 Mr. Bharatkumar Nagraj Jain, Income Tax Officer-31(2)(3), Proprietor Of N.R. Computech, (Erstwhile Income Tax बनाम/ 23/11, Jawahar Nagar, Officer-24(3)(4), Vs. Goregaon (East), R. No.705, C-11, 7Th Floor, Mumbai-400063 Pratyakshkar Bhavan, B.K.C. Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Acwpj1720C C.O. No.06 To 08/Mum/2017 Bharat Kumar Nagraj Jain Assessment Years: 2010-11 Income Tax Officer-31(2)(3), Mr. Bharatkumar Nagraj (Erstwhile Income Tax Officer- Jain, बनाम/ 24(3)(4), Proprietor Of N.R. Vs. R. No.705, C-11, 7Th Floor, Computech, 23/11, Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Jawahar Nagar, B.K.C. Bandra (East), Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400063 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Acwpj1720C

…ers instituted in this court. But the message does not appear to have percolated down to all the others courts in the hierarchy.” 3.3 Furthermore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vedabai Alia Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil vs. Shantaram Baburao Patil 253 ITR 798 (SC) held that the court has to exercise the discretion on the facts of each case keeping in mind that in construing the expression ‘sufficient cause’, the principle of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance. The court held that the expression “sufficient cause” should receive liberal construction. 3.4 The decision of the Tribu…

Taurus Transport, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 13(2), Mumbai

The Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…the life purpose of the existence of the institution of the courts. When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Vedabhai vs Santaram 253 ITR 798 observed that inordinate delay calls of cautious approach. This means that there should be no malafide or dilatory tactics. Sufficient cause should receive liberal construction to advance substantial justice. The Hon’ble Apex Court in 167 ITR 471 observed as under:- “3. The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting sec…

Taurus Transport, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 13(2), Mumbai

The Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…the life purpose of the existence of the institution of the courts. When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Vedabhai vs Santaram 253 ITR 798 observed that inordinate delay calls of cautious approach. This means that there should be no malafide or dilatory tactics. Sufficient cause should receive liberal construction to advance substantial justice. The Hon’ble Apex Court in 167 ITR 471 observed as under:- “3. The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting sec…

DCIT 9(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Acon Measurement P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit -9(1))(1), M/S Acon Measurement Pvt. Room No.260A, 02Nd Floor बनाम/ Limited, Aayakar Bhavan A-22, Nanddham Indl. Estate, Vs. M.K. Road Marol Maroshi Road, Mumbai-400020. Andheri (East), Mumbai-400059 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aaaca5078K

…he life purpose of the existence of the institution of the courts. When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Vedabhai vs Santaram 253 ITR 798 observed that inordinate delay calls of cautious approach. This means that there should be no malafide or dilatory tactics. Sufficient cause should receive liberal construction to advance substantial justice. The Hon’ble Apex Court in 167 ITR 471 observed as under:- “3. The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting sect…

Uniliver Industries P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

…in filing the appeal cannot be so liberally construed particularly in view of the fact that period of the delay is of a substantial period. Furthermore we note that honourable apex court in the case of Vedabhai Baburao Patil vs Shantaram Baburao Patil (2002) 253 ITR 798 has held that though in exercising discretion, under section 5 of the Limitation act 1963 to condone the delay for sufficient cause in not preferring an appeal or other application within the time prescribed, the court should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made where the delay is inordinate and the case where the delays of a fe…

Oricon Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 20, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed as not admitted

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Orion Enterprises, Acit, Flat No.602B, Foreshore Central Circle-20, बनाम/ Apts, Juhu Tara Road, Mumbai Vs. Santacruz West, Mumbai-400049 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.Aabfo0229Q "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By None राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Subhacham Ram Cit-Dr

…ere beyond his/its control and at the same time, the reasons were ‘good and sufficeint’, rather, it is a clear cut case of conscious decision. Even, the Hon’ble Apex Court in Vedabai alias Vaijayanatabai Baburao vs Shantarma Bavurao Patil reported in (2002) 253 ITR 798 (SC) made a distinction in delay and inordinate delay observed (page 799) as under:- “In exercising discretion u/s 5 of the limitation Act, the Court should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case, where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a 10 M/s Orian Enterprises few days. Whereas, in the fo…

Khaja Mohiaddin G. Syed, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 24(1)(1)/30(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2011-12 Shri Khaja Mohiaddin Income Tax Officer, G.Syed, Ward-31(2)(2), बनाम/ B-202, Sagar Tower, Room No.709, 7Th Floor, C- Vs. Aqsa Masjid Lane, 11, Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Opp. 24 Karat, Off. S.V. Bandra Kurla Complex, Road, Fairdeal Road, Bandra (East), Jogeshwari (West), Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400102 Pan No.Abhps6792D ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue)

…ence of the institution of the 4 Shri Khaja Mohiaddin G.Syed courts. When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Vedabhai vs Santaram 253 ITR 798 observed that inordinate delay calls of cautious approach. This means that there should be no malafide or dilatory tactics. Sufficient cause should receive liberal construction to advance substantial justice. The Hon’ble Apex Court in 167 ITR 471 observed as under:- “3. The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting section…

Om Gagangiri Stone Crusher, Thane vs. CIT II, Thane

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainm/S. Om Gagangiri Stone Cursher Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii Akshya Building, 2Nd Floor 9Th Floor, Vardan Building Vs. Azad Chowk, Kharegaon Midc Wagle Estate’ Thane (W) 400605 Thane Pan – Aabfo1488P Appellant Respondent

…order under section 263 of the Act dated 28.03.2013. It is pertinent to note that the assessee did not file any petition before the Tribunal for condoning the delay. 3.3 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vedabai vs. Shantaram Baburao Patil & Others (2002) 253 ITR 798 has held that while exercising discretion in dealing with case of condonation of delay, it would depend on the facts of each case. In the case on hand, in the absence of any petition for condonation of delay being filed and the assessee/authorised representative not being present before the Tribunal, we are of the view that no case for condonatio…

Piyush Madhani, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 44, Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…g the life purpose of the existence of the institution of the courts. When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in Vedabhai vs Santaram 253 ITR 798 observed that inordinate delay calls of cautious approach. 4 ITA No. 4210-4213/Mum/2016 Mr. Piyush Madhani This means that there should be no mala fide or dilatory tactics. Sufficient cause should receive liberal construction to advance substantial justice. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in 167 ITR 471 observed as under:- “3. The legislature has confer…

Piyush Madhani, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 44, Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…g the life purpose of the existence of the institution of the courts. When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in Vedabhai vs Santaram 253 ITR 798 observed that inordinate delay calls of cautious approach. 4 ITA No. 4210-4213/Mum/2016 Mr. Piyush Madhani This means that there should be no mala fide or dilatory tactics. Sufficient cause should receive liberal construction to advance substantial justice. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in 167 ITR 471 observed as under:- “3. The legislature has confer…

Piyush Madhani, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 44, Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…g the life purpose of the existence of the institution of the courts. When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in Vedabhai vs Santaram 253 ITR 798 observed that inordinate delay calls of cautious approach. 4 ITA No. 4210-4213/Mum/2016 Mr. Piyush Madhani This means that there should be no mala fide or dilatory tactics. Sufficient cause should receive liberal construction to advance substantial justice. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in 167 ITR 471 observed as under:- “3. The legislature has confer…

Piyush Madhani, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 44, Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…g the life purpose of the existence of the institution of the courts. When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in Vedabhai vs Santaram 253 ITR 798 observed that inordinate delay calls of cautious approach. 4 ITA No. 4210-4213/Mum/2016 Mr. Piyush Madhani This means that there should be no mala fide or dilatory tactics. Sufficient cause should receive liberal construction to advance substantial justice. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in 167 ITR 471 observed as under:- “3. The legislature has confer…

Mohd Gafuruddin F. Siddique, Mumbai vs. CIT 15, Mumbai

The appeal is dismissed as not admitted

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2006-07 Mohd. Gafuruddin F. Siddiqui, Cit-15, Flat No.1, Gr. Flr, Saadath Mumbai बनाम/ Manzil, 35, Bora St. Null Vs. Bazar, Behind Safai Masjid, Mumbai-400003 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aapps1966C

…e of conscious decision in not filing the appeal and thereafter after such a huge delay, there is again a conscious decision to file the appeal. Even, the Hon’ble Apex Court in Vedabai alias Vaijayanatabai Baburao vs Shantaram Bavurao Patil reported in (2002) 253 ITR 798 (SC) made a distinction in delay and inordinate delay observed (page 799) as under:- “In exercising discretion u/s 5 of the limitation Act, the Court should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case, where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas, in the former case, the considerati…

Addl CIT RG 1(2), Mumbai vs. Morgan Stanley India Securities P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, then the cross objections of the assessee will become in-fructuous

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Years: 2008-09

…g the life purpose of the existence of the institution of the courts. When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Vedabhai vs Santaram 253 ITR 798 observed that inordinate delay calls of cautious approach. This means that there should be no malafide or dilatory tactics. Sufficient cause should receive liberal construction to advance substantial justice. The Hon’ble Apex Court in 167 ITR 471 observed as under:- “3. The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting section…