9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (7) TMI 939 - HC - Income TaxCondonation of delay - Interests of justice would be served if delay in filing the appeal is condoned subject to the condition that the appellant shall pay costs quantified at 10, 000/- to the respondent- which shall be paid within one month from today.
Issues:
Delay in filing income-tax appeal for assessment year 2004-05. Analysis: The appellant filed a notice of motion for condonation of a 515-day delay in filing the income-tax appeal for the assessment year 2004-05. The appellant sought to raise a substantial question of law regarding the disallowance of a deduction under section 80-IA by the Tribunal. The appellant's counsel highlighted that a similar appeal for the earlier assessment year had already been admitted by the Court. The cause for the delay was attributed to the negligence of the appellant's consultant, who misplaced the impugned order, leading to the delay in filing the appeal. The appellant's counsel argued that there was no deliberate delay or inaction on the part of the appellant and cited relevant Supreme Court decisions to support the contention that the expression "sufficient cause" should be interpreted liberally. On the other hand, the respondent's counsel opposed the notice of motion, claiming gross delay and negligence on the appellant's part in taking necessary steps within the limitation period. The Supreme Court's stance on what constitutes "sufficient cause" under section 5 of the Limitation Act was discussed, emphasizing that the delay should not be due to negligence in taking necessary steps. Considering the facts that the appellant's appeal for the earlier assessment year had been admitted, the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal had not been approved by the Madras High Court, and the delay was due to negligence by the appellant's consultant's staff, the Court decided to condone the delay in filing the appeal. The Court ordered the appellant to pay costs quantified at Rs. 10,000 to the respondent within one month. The notice of motion was made absolute, and the motion was disposed of accordingly.
|
