The High Court allowed Civil Application No. 6224/2011, condoning a delay of 685 days in filing an Income Tax Appeal. It issued notice and scheduled the appeal for admission.
Delay of 685 days is condoned. Notice of appeal issued and case posted for admission.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
(1) CA No. 6224/2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6224 OF 2011
IN
TAX APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 3563 OF 2011
The Commissioner of Income Tax-1
Applicant.
Versus
Karjatkar Leasing & Finance Pvt. Ltd. Respondent.
Mr. Kadethankar, Advocate for the applicants.
CORAM : P.B. VARALE AND
SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ.
Dated : 13-12-2017.
PER COURT :-
. Heard Mr. Alok Sharma, learned Standing Counsel for the applicant and Mrs. C.S. Deshmukh for the respondent.
prays for condonation of delay of 685 days caused in filing appeal. Mr. Sharma invited our attention to the grounds raised in the application, more particularly Paragraph Nos.3, 4 and 5. It is submission of Mr. Sharma that the order passed by Income
(2) CA No. 6224/2011
Tax Appellate Tribunal was challenged by way of an application before the Tribunal itself. The application was pending for some time. Subsequently the Department was taking necessary steps. As the Department was under the impression that certain orders would be passed in the application and the application was pending for a considerable period, there was some communication between the authorities. Learned Counsel Mr. Sharma submits that as the appellant raised substantial grounds in the appeal alongwith the substantial questions of law whereby the penalty against the respondent is sought to be recovered, Mr. Sharma submits that as the issue revolves around the revenue to be recovered by way of taxes, the application be allowed and the appellant be permitted to prosecute the appeal on its merit.
(3) CA No. 6224/2011
the respondent.
17.01.2018.
( SUNIL K. KOTWAL) ( P.B. VARALE) JUDGE JUDGE
vdd/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether condonation of delay is justified for filing the Income Tax appeal.
Whether the applicant is permitted to prosecute the appeal on merits.
Commissioner of Income Tax-1
Karjatkar Leasing & Finance Pvt. Ltd.
P.B. Varale
Sunil K. Kotwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
