Commissioner of Income-tax (C)-I v. Bhushan Steel Limited - 2017-LL-0515-10

Citation	2017-LL-0515-10
Appellant Name	Commissioner of Income-tax (C)-I
Respondent Name	Bhushan Steel Limited
Court	HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	15/05/2017
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	condonation of delay • good and sufficient cause • delay in filing appeal
Bot Summary:	There is an inordinate delay of 1182 days in re-filing the appeal. The Court finds that the standard excuse that the department is putting forth in all such applications for condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal is two-fold. The first is regarding the practice directions issued by this Court for e-filing of the appeals. It is not possible to accept that no one followed up on the filing of appeals and allowed a period of more than three years to elapse before the appeal could be re-filed. The Department has a cell in the High Court which is under the supervision of a Deputy CIT. He ought to be keeping track of the filing of appeals and should be able to know if any appeal entrusted to the panel counsel for filing has not been listed even once before the Court for a long time 5. The Court is not persuaded to condone the extraordinary delay of 1182 days in re-filing the appeal. The application bearing CM APPL No.14175 of 2017 for condonation of the delay of 1182 days in re-filing the appeal is dismissed.

$ * IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 4 + ITA 288/2017 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C)-I Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar with Mr. Dileep Shivpuri, Advocates. versus BHUSHAN STEEL LIMITED Respondent Through: Ms. Kavita Jha with Mr. Bhuvan, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR ORDER % 15.05.2017 CM APPL 14174/2017 (for exemption) 1. Allowed subject to all just exceptions. CM APPL 14175/2017 (delay) & ITA 288/2017 2. There is inordinate delay of 1182 days in re-filing appeal. 3. Court finds that standard excuse that department is putting forth in all such applications for condonation of delay in re-filing appeal is two-fold. first is regarding practice directions issued by this Court for e-filing of appeals. As has already been observed by this Court in several orders, practice directions were issued after consultation with bar and after giving sufficient time for bar to get acquainted with requirement of e-filing. Additionally, Court has also provided scanning ITA 288/2017 Page 1 of 2 machines at filing counter so that no difficulty is caused to bar for switching over to system of e-filing. In any event, delay of over three years on this ground is wholly unacceptable. 4. second is regarding change of Standing counsel for Department. This again, does not impress Court. It is not possible to accept that no one followed up on filing of appeals and allowed period of more than three years to elapse before appeal could be re-filed. Department has cell in High Court which is under supervision of Deputy CIT. He ought to be keeping track of filing of appeals and should be able to know if any appeal entrusted to panel counsel for filing has not been listed even once before Court for long time 5. Consequently, Court is not persuaded to condone extraordinary delay of 1182 days in re-filing appeal. 6. application bearing CM APPL No.14175 of 2017 for condonation of delay of 1182 days in re-filing appeal is dismissed. appeal also stands dismissed. S.MURALIDHAR, J CHANDER SHEKHAR, J MAY 15, 2017 Rm ITA 288/2017 Page 2 of 2 Commissioner of Income-tax (C)-I v. Bhushan Steel Limited

Metadata

Judgment