Commissioner of Income Tax-III v. Shubhani Engineering & Consultant Pvt. Ltd.

Delhi High Court · 09 Nov 2016 · 2016:DHC:8396-DB
S. Ravindra Bhat; Najmi Waziri
ITA 704/2016
2016:DHC:8396-DB
tax appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's time-barred appeals for lack of sufficient cause to condone a 997-day delay in re-filing against the ITAT's order.

Full Text
Translation output
> $-2-4 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
ITA 704/2016
COMMISSIONER OFINCOMETAX-III Appellant
Through:Mr.Dileep Shivpuri,Sr.Standing Counsel with Mr.Sanjay Kumar and Mr.Vikrant
A.Maheshwari,Advs.
VERSUS
SHUBHANIENGINEERING& CONSULTANT PVT.LTD. Respondent
Through
ITA 705/2016
COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX-III Appellant
VERSUS
SHUBHANIENGINEERING & CONSULTANT
Through
ITA 706/2016
COMMISSIONER OFINCOMETAX-III Appellant
VERSUS
SHUBHANIENGINEERING& CONSULTANT
Through 2016:DHC:8396-DB
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE NAJMIWAZIRI
09.11.2016 ITA No. 704/2016 & CM Nos. 37497/2016 rexemption) &
37498/2016 Ccondonation ofdelay of997 days in re-filing)
ITA No. 705/2016 & CM No.37499/2016 ^condonation ofdelay of
997 days in re-filingl ITA No. 706/2016 & CM Nos. 37500/2016 rexemption) &
37501/2016 ^condonation ofdelay of997 days in re-fllingl
The Revenue is aggrieved by a common order of the Income
Tax Appellate Tribunal ofthree assessment years. At the outset we notice that the appeals are hopelessly time barred; Revenue has expended over 900 days in re-filing the appeals. The explanation given is that the official panel was changed and that there was an unusual pendency ofcases.
This can hardly be categorized as sufficient cause warranting condonation ofdelay. The applications for condonation ofdelay are, accordingly,dismissed. That meansthat appeals too are,accordingly, dismissed.
S.RAVINDRA BHAT,J NOVEMBER 09,2016/kk NAJMI WAZIRI,J
2016:DHC:8396-DB
JUDGMENT