2018 (1) TMI 860 - HC - Income Tax

Application filed u/s 254 (2) seeking rectification of order 2016 (8) TMI 263 - ITAT DELHI - condonation of delay - Held that - Having already affirmed the order of the ITAT which is sought to be rectified this Court is not inclined to interfere with its subsequent order declining to rectify the said order. Secondly the Court finds that the ground on which such rectification was sought was far beyond the scope of the powers of rectification of the ITAT under Section 254 (2) of the Act. The Court therefore finds no error having been committed by the ITAT in dismissing the Appellant s application under Section 254 (2) of the Act.

Summary

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing appeal
2. Rectification of order by ITAT under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeal:
The appellant filed an appeal with a delay of 278 days against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The Court dismissed the application for condonation of delay, leading to the dismissal of the appeal itself. The Court affirmed its decision not to interfere with the dismissal of the appeal due to the delay, emphasizing the importance of adhering to procedural timelines in legal matters.

Rectification of Order by ITAT under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
The appellant filed an application under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking rectification of the ITAT's order dated 24th June, 2016. The Court noted that it had already affirmed the order in question and found that the grounds for rectification were beyond the scope of the ITAT's powers under Section 254(2) of the Act. Consequently, the Court upheld the ITAT's decision to dismiss the appellant's application for rectification, stating that no error was committed by the ITAT in doing so. As a result, the appeal and application were both dismissed by the Court.

In conclusion, the High Court of Delhi addressed the issues of condonation of delay in filing the appeal and the rectification of the ITAT's order under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The judgment emphasized the importance of procedural compliance and upheld the ITAT's decision to dismiss the appellant's application for rectification, citing that the grounds for rectification were beyond the scope of the ITAT's powers.