Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2014 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (11) TMI 178 - HC - Income TaxCondonation of delay – delay of 117 days in filing appeal and 1248 days in filing review petition – Held that:- The explanations offered are an after thought and to cover up the lapses - There is complete silence as to why a statement is made that the department was unaware of the Courts order and at the same time annexing photo copies of the order passed on 17th June, 2009 and 23rd July, 2009 both of which indicate the presence of the revenue/ department counsel when these orders were passed - the Court matters are taken lightly and casually and an impression has been created that the State or the Revenue seeks to get away or take a easy route of offering routine explanations and blaming officers or their advocates - If the cause shown cannot be said to be bonafide and demonstrating utter negligence and callousness, then, we do not see how it can assist the revenue any longer - The appeal which is lodged in the year 2008 remained on the file and was pending for removal of office objections. None bothered to have them removed until this Court noted in June 2009 that the Revenue has failed to comply with the office objections or the rules in that behalf - Time was given to comply with that and it is only thereafter that the Court visited the Revenue with the consequences in law - though the appeal stood dismissed and without any further reference to the Court in 2009, the revenue did not lodge a Review Petition until January 2013 and to be precise the lodging date is 22nd January, 2013 - The Review Petition also remained unattended and we have from the original record found that there were office objections and which were to the knowledge of the advocate filing the Review Petition - the explanation is offered for this enormous delay and which is to be contained in the affidavit in support of the application for condonation of delay. The delay does not deserves to be condoned - their presence in the Court to own the lapse and deficiency will not assist and the revenue in any manner when they filed affidavits and made solemn statements before this Court but which are contrary to the record - once the successors to those who were incharge in 2008-09 are trying to cover up the past lapses, then, it is evident that the whole attempt is to ensure that none is ever held responsible and accountable for these state of affairs - each of the notice of motions fail and they are dismissed – Decided against revenue.
|