9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 429X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct that Ext.P4 order of the assessing authority had not been carried in appeal by the petitioner, the 1st respondent, when considering the delay condonation application preferred by the petitioner, passed Ext.P2 order refusing to condone the delay - When the matter came up for admission before this Court, and on a request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, he was permitted to pref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ph Jerard Samson Rodrigues For the Respondents : By Government Pleader Dr. Thushara James JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P2 order passed by the 1st respondent, rejecting an application preferred by him for condonation of delay in filing returns wherein he had raised the claim for input tax credit. It is seen from Ext.P2 order of the respondents tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r an appeal against Ext.P4 order of the Assessing Officer so as to keep the issue of belated filing of return and condonation thereof alive. The petitioner has accordingly prefered Ext.P5 appeal before the Joint Commissioner [Appeals], Ernakulam, who is suo motu impleaded as the additional 3rd respondent in the Writ Petition. 4. Taking note of the above situation and finding that if the 1st res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th produce the same before the additional 3rd respondent, who shall then consider Ext.P5 appeal and pass orders thereon based on the orders passed by the 1st respondent on the delay condonation application as directed. The 1st respondent shall pass orders in Ext.P5 appeal within three weeks after the date of receipt of the order of the 1st respondent and after hearing the petitioner. iv. The pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
