Pr.Commissioner of Income-tax-09, New Delhi v. Usha International Ltd. (Formerly Known As the Jay Engineering Works Ltd.)
[Citation -2017-LL-0501-48]

Citation 2017-LL-0501-48
Appellant Name Pr.Commissioner of Income-tax-09, New Delhi
Respondent Name Usha International Ltd. (Formerly Known As the Jay Engineering Works Ltd.)
Court HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 01/05/2017
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags condonation of delay • good and sufficient cause • delay in filing appeal
Bot Summary: The explanation offered for the delay is given in paras 3, 4 and 5 of the explanation, which read as under: 3. The appeal has to be processed through official channel/hierarchy and the appeal has been filed by the Appellant as he is authorized to file appeal under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Further, this office has also received other CIT and ITAT, High Court order and same was required to be seen with regard to taking decision for filing further appeal along with this appeal. There had been frequent transfer and posting at the level of AO which caused undue delay in filing this appeal. The Supreme Court has in State of U.P. v. Amar Nath Yadav 2 SCC 422 reiterated its earlier decision in Postmaster General v. Living Media India Limited 3 SCC 563 where it was observed as under: In our view, it is the right time to inform all the government bodies, their agencies and instrumentalities that unless they have reasonable and acceptable explanation for the delay and there was bonafide effort, there is no need to accept the usual explanation that the file was kept pending for process. The mere fact that the Assessing Officer was busy in other time bearing assessments can hardly be an excuse, particularly given the fact that under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the time period for filing of an appeal is 120 days. There is no explanation for every day s delay.


$ 38 * IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 326/2017 PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-09,NEW DELHI Appellant Through: Mr. Arun Khatri, Junior Standing Counsel versus USHA INTERNATIONAL LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS JAY ENGINEERING WORKS LTD.) Respondent Through: Mr. V.P. Gupta & Mr. Arunav Kumar, Advocates CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR ORDER % 01.05.2017 CM No.16419/2017 1. There is delay of 190 days in filing appeal. explanation offered for delay is given in paras 3, 4 and 5 of explanation, which read as under: 3. That said delay in fining appeal has arisen in bona fide circumstances and for no fault or omission or negligence on part of Applicant/ Appellant herein and earnest efforts had been made by Applicant /Appellant to expedite process at various stages of finalizing accompanying application, within earliest possible time. 4. That appeal has been filed on basis of records maintained in office of concerned Assessing Officer. appeal has to be processed through official channel/hierarchy and appeal has been filed by Appellant as he is authorized to file appeal under Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. That Assessing Officer was busy in several other time bearing assessments and was involved in scrutiny assessment works. Further, this office has also received other CIT (Appeals) and ITAT, High Court order and same was required to be seen with regard to taking decision for filing further appeal along with this appeal. Beside this, several other compliances have to be fulfilled by Assessing Officer, which has caused inadvertent delay. Also, there had been frequent transfer and posting at level of AO which caused undue delay in filing this appeal. 2. Supreme Court has in State of U.P. v. Amar Nath Yadav (2014) 2 SCC 422 reiterated its earlier decision in Postmaster General v. Living Media India Limited (2012) 3 SCC 563 where it was observed as under: In our view, it is right time to inform all government bodies, their agencies and instrumentalities that unless they have reasonable and acceptable explanation for delay and there was bonafide effort, there is no need to accept usual explanation that file was kept pending for process. government departments are under special obligation to ensure that they perform their duties with diligence and commitment. Condonation of delay is exception and should not be used as anticipated benefit for Government Departments. law shelters everyone under same light and should not be swirled for benefit of few. 3. reasons given in present application are wholly unsatisfactory. mere fact that Assessing Officer was busy in other time bearing assessments can hardly be excuse, particularly given fact that under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961, time period for filing of appeal is 120 days. No other statute prescribes time period of over three months. Moreover, there is no explanation for every day s delay. delay of 190 days cannot be said to be routine. 4. With there being no satisfactory explanation, application is dismissed. Consequently, appeal is also dismissed. S.MURALIDHAR, J CHANDER SHEKHAR, J MAY 01, 2017 tp Pr.Commissioner of Income-tax-09, New Delhi v. Usha International Ltd. (Formerly Known As Jay Engineering Works Ltd.)
Report Error