Dismissed

M/S.Inderlok Hotel Pvt. Ltd. v. the Commissioner

Madras HC2 Aug 2023CRP/194/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Civil Revision Petition was dismissed. The High Court held that civil revisions cannot interfere with the trial court's discretionary exercise in condoning delay in taxation matters, citing a precedent where such discretion was to be respected even if reasons were not explicitly implicit in the affidavit.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition dismissed. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petition closed.

M/S.Inderlok Hotel Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Commissioner — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.R.P.(PD)No.194 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 02.08.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶6

C.R.P.(PD)No.194 of 2019 and C.M.P.No.1558 of 2019

¶7

Indralok Hotel Pvt. Ltd. No.216, Poonamallee High Road, Kilpauk Chennai-600 010. .. Petitioner Vs.

¶8

The Commissioner The Greater Chennai Corporation Rippon Buildings Chennai-600 003. .. Respondent

¶9

PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decretal order dated 31.10.2018 passed in C.M.P.No.102 of 2017 in M.T.A.(SR)No.3684 of 2016 by the Principal Court, City Civil Court, Chennai, whereby the learned Judge has condoned the extraordinary delay of around five years (1624 days).

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr. Richardson Wilson

¶11

1/5

¶12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶13

C.R.P.(PD)No.194 of 2019

¶14

for M/s. P.Wilson Associates

¶15

For Respondent : Ms.K.Aswini Devi

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. I have carefully gone through the records.

¶18

The Greater Chennai Corporation has filed an application with

¶19

the delay of 1624 days in preferring the appeal before the learned Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. The appeal is against an order passed by the Taxation Appeals Tribunal in T.A.T.No.65/10, dated 09.07.2012.

¶20

The dispute seems to be that instead of calculating the payment

¶21

for the first half of 2006 and 2007, it was made from the second half of 2006 and 2007. Apart from that, the reduction in tax from Rs.38,91,504/to Rs.11,63,702/- is the subject matter before the Appellate Authority. Though I do not find the reasons for condoning the delay implicit in the

¶22

2/5

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

C.R.P.(PD)No.194 of 2019

¶25

affidavit, the learned Judge has exercised her discretion and allowed the application on payment of cost of Rs.10,000/-.

¶26

An exercise of discretion by the trial Court especially in condonation of delay in taxation matters should not be interfered with in

¶27

revision. This position has been laid down in N. Balakrishnan vs. M.Krishnamurthy 1998 (7) SCC 123. The trial Court has exercised the discretion and condoned the delay. I do not want to substitute my reasons to the same.

¶28

Mr.Richardson Wilson, learned counsel for the petitioner would

¶29

state that after the delay had been condoned, the main appeal itself has been taken up for arguments and orders have been reserved for more than six months. Since it is the matter affecting the finance of the Greater Chennai Corporation, I request the learned Appellate Authority to pronounce orders on or before 31.08.2023.

¶30

3/5

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

C.R.P.(PD)No.194 of 2019

¶33

With the above observation, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶34

02.08.2023

¶35

Index:Yes/No Speaking Order :Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No

¶36

¶37

¶38

The Principal Judge City Civil Court, Chennai.

¶39

4/5

¶40

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶41

C.R.P.(PD)No.194 of 2019

¶42

V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN,J.

¶43

¶44

C.R.P.(PD)No.194 of 2019 and C.M.P.No.1558 of 2019

¶45

02.08.2023

¶46

5/5

¶47

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

M/S.Inderlok Hotel Pvt. Ltd. v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Inderlok Hotel Pvt. Ltd. v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

E.Kasthuri Vs D.Suriyakanth

A.Shanmugam Vs Palani Achari (Died)

S.Prankia Vs S.Deppan Sakthivel

R.Venugopal Vs Raj Trading Co.

J.Kishore Kumar Vs a.S.Vijay Anand

Ayyammal Vs Poorani