2020 (2) TMI 1689 - HC - Income Tax

Limitation prescribed u/s 132 - limitation period of 60 days - communication herein is in terms of Section-37 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, read with Section-132 of the Income Tax Act - HELD THAT - It postulates a limitation period of 60 days with regard to such an impugned order. The same having been examined and following the judgments of the Hon ble Supreme Court on this point, the impugned orders were quashed by the learned Single Judge. Under these circumstances, we find no good ground to entertain this appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal against writ petition order, nexus of decisions, limitation under Section-132 of Income Tax Act, impugned communication under Section-37 of Foreign Exchange Management Act.

The High Court of Karnataka heard an appeal against the order of a learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.47822 of 2018, where the writ petition was allowed. The appellants contended that the Single Judge's order was erroneous as the decisions relied upon were not relevant to the case. This contention was disputed by the respondents' counsel. The Court, after considering the arguments, found no merit in the appeal. The writ petition was allowed based on the limitation prescribed under Section-132 of the Income Tax Act. The impugned communication was made under Section-37 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, read with Section-132 of the Income Tax Act, which imposed a 60-day limitation period for such orders. The Single Judge quashed the impugned orders following judgments of the Supreme Court on this point. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as the Court found no grounds to entertain it.

The Court's decision to dismiss the appeal rendered the application seeking condonation of delay irrelevant. Therefore, I.A.No.1 of 2020 was also dismissed in light of the appeal's dismissal.