Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2019 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (9) TMI 634 - HC - Income TaxCondonation of delay - delay is of 20 years - as per applicant she entrusted her brief to her advocate and her advocate did not take any steps to pursue the matter - HELD THAT:- Mr. Motwani, learned counsel for the applicant could not point out before this Court that at any point of time from 18.10.1997, when the decree, which is sought to be challenged before this Court, was passed, the applicant even remotely tried to contact her advocate to know the fate of litigation. In the application, it is stated that she entrusted her matter to Mr. Vilas Mate, of Tumsar. She never met with Mr. Bhole, Advocate. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Bhole might, on instructions from Mr.Vilas Mate, have appeared before the Court below. It is very easy for a litigant to make allegations against an advocate behind his back. If the applicant wishes to make allegations against the advocate, the applicant should have a courage to join the advocate as a party and in his presence should make allegation against him. Here, the applicant wants to condemn the advocate behind his back. In my view, it is impermissible and unacceptable. Further, no steps are also being taken by the applicant against any advocate under the provision of the Advocates Act. Thus, the reason as supplemented in the application is nothing but a attempt for claiming discretionary relief of condonation of delay from the Court. The applicant has not explained the delay, rather has not given plausible explanation for delay. Application dismissed with costs of ₹ 1,000/-
|