Commissioner of Income-tax (LTU) v. Reliance Industries Ltd
[Citation -2018-LL-1026-26]

Citation 2018-LL-1026-26
Appellant Name Commissioner of Income-tax (LTU)
Respondent Name Reliance Industries Ltd.
Court SUPREME COURT
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 26/10/2018
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags condonation of delay • removal of defect
Bot Summary: An application for condonation of delay was also filed. Since there was abnormal delay, the Registrar/Prothonotary Senior Master of the Bombay High Court passed the Order dismissing the appeal for non-removal of office objections. The appellant herein took out a Notice of Motion against the aforesaid Order which has been rejected by the High Court vide the impugned Judgment. No doubt, there is a long delay in removing Signature Not Verified the objections, we are of the opinion that in a case Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR RAKHEJA Date: 2018.10.29 16:56:10 IST Reason: like this the High Court should have condoned the delay in removing the office objections and heard the 2 matter on merits. For the said delay caused by the appellant, the appellant shall pay cost of Rupees one lac within four weeks, which shall be deposited with the Supreme Court Bar Association Lawyers' Welfare Fund. In view of the above, we condone the delay in removing office objections and remit the matter to the High Court for consideration of the case on merits. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.


IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10774 OF 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) NO. 19880 OF 2018 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LTU) APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/S RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD. RESPONDENT(S) ORDER Leave granted. appeal was filed by Department (appellant herein) before High Court against judgment of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). However, said appeal was defective and appellant took abnormal time of 1371 days in removing those defects. application for condonation of delay was also filed. Since there was abnormal delay, Registrar/Prothonotary & Senior Master of Bombay High Court passed Order dismissing appeal for non-removal of office objections. appellant herein took out Notice of Motion against aforesaid Order which has been rejected by High Court vide impugned Judgment. No doubt, there is long delay in removing Signature Not Verified objections, we are of opinion that in case Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR RAKHEJA Date: 2018.10.29 16:56:10 IST Reason: like this High Court should have condoned delay in removing office objections and heard 2 matter on merits. However, for said delay caused by appellant, appellant shall pay cost of Rupees one lac within four weeks, which shall be deposited with Supreme Court Bar Association Lawyers' Welfare Fund. In view of above, we condone delay in removing office objections and remit matter to High Court for consideration of case on merits. appeal is allowed as indicated above. ... ................J. (A.K. SIKRI) ... ................J. (ASHOK BHUSHAN) NEW DELHI, OCTOBER 26, 2018 3 ITEM NO.42 COURT NO.4 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19880/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22-08-2017 in NOM No. 684/2017 passed by High Court of Judicature At Bombay) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LTU) Petitioner(s) VERSUS M/S RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD. Respondent(s) Date : 26-10-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN For Petitioner(s) Mfr. Vikramjit Banerjee, ASG Ms. Purnima Bhat Kak, Adv. Mr. Manish Pushkarna, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. S.K. Bagaria, Sr. Adv. Mr. K. R. Sasiprabhu, AOR Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rohit Chandra, Adv. UPON hearing counsel Court made following O R D E R Leave granted. appeal stands allowed in terms of signed order. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SUSHIL KUMAR RAKHEJA) (RAJINDER KAUR) AR-CUM-PS BRANCH OFFICER (Signed order is placed on file.) Commissioner of Income-tax (LTU) v. Reliance Industries Ltd
Report Error