9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 670 - HC - Income TaxCondonation of delay in appeal filed by the revenue - delay of 1223 days - decision to file an appeal was taken by the department much after the decision of this Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-5 v. Swati Bajaj 2022 (6) TMI 670 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT - HELD THAT - The appellant/department having not been diligent cannot now take advantage of the decision of Swati Bajaj and state that the delay of 1223 days has to be condoned. The law of limitation will not assist the person who is not diligent of his right. There is no separate law of limitation for the Government nor any latitude can be shown to the Government as the Government is as good as any other litigant and said to be the largest litigant. Revenue could not file appeal only to take the advantage of recent High court decision. Decided against revenue.
Issues: Delay in filing appeal, Condonation of delay, Law of limitation, Government as a litigant
The High Court of Calcutta, comprising Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, heard the case involving a delay of 1223 days in filing an appeal by the appellant/revenue. The order under challenge was passed by the Tribunal on November 16, 2018, with the certified copy received on December 20, 2018, and the appeal presented to the Court on August 24, 2022. The Court noted that the delay from November 20, 2018, had not been adequately explained, with the reasons provided being self-serving and lacking substance. The Court highlighted that the decision to appeal was made by the department well after a previous court decision, emphasizing the importance of diligence in exercising one's legal rights. The judgment stressed that the law of limitation applies equally to the Government as to any other litigant, with no special leniency granted to the Government due to its status as a significant litigant. Consequently, the Court declined to condone the delay, dismissing the application for condonation of delay (IA No.GA/1/2022) and rejecting the appeal filed by the revenue (ITAT/189/2022). Additionally, the application for stay (IA No.GA/2/2022) was also closed in light of the dismissal of the appeal.
|
