This order dismisses an application for condonation of an 825-day delay in re-filing an appeal by the Income Tax Department. The Court rejected budgetary constraints and practice direction changes as insufficient explanations.
Application for condonation of delay of 825 days dismissed; appeal dismissed.
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.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ashok Manchanda, Senior Standing counsel.
H.B. STOCKHOLDING LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Santosh K. Aggarwal, Advocate.
CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
CM No. 3175/2016 (for condonation of delay of 825 days in re-filing the appeal) & ITA No. 109/2016
ITA No. 109/2016
Page 1 of 2
S. MURALIDHAR, J
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
FEBRUARY 08, 2016/ dn
ITA No. 109/2016
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether condonation of delay of 825 days due to budgetary constraints and practice directions can be accepted.
Whether the applicant satisfactorily proved sufficient cause for inordinate delay in re-filing the appeal.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV
H.B. STOCKHOLDING LTD.
S. MURALIDHAR
VIBHU BAKHRU
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
