TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 24X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f 928 days in filing the appeal is that it was first filed in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, which held by its order dated 11th October, 2012 that it did not have territorial jurisdiction, since the order was passed by the Assessing Officer ( AO ) at Delhi. Even accepting this position, it is seen from para 7 of the application for condonation of delay that the present appeal was filed only in August 2014 i.e. nearly 2 years after the order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. There is not even a single line of explanation for this delay. No convincing explanation has been given by the Appellant for the extraordinary delay in filing and refiling the present appeal. The applications are dismissed. - ITA 383/2019, CM APPLs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess of reallocation of appeals took time, it was allocated ultimately only in March 2016 to another Standing Counsel who, however, never informed the Appellant about the status of appeal nor the defect pointed out by the Registry . It is then stated that recently the Appellant came to know that the appeal had not been listed before the Court and it is only thereafter on 19th November, 2018 that the CIT (Judicial) reallocated the appeal to the present counsel. Even thereafter the appeal was not refiled till 3rd January, 2019. 4. The above explanation is on the face of it most unconvincing. It displays a lackadaisical attitude on the part of the Appellant in pursuing the appeal, knowing fully well that even in the first instance t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... observed as under: We are of the view that a clear signal has to sent to the Government Authorities that they cannot approach the Court as and when they please, on account of gross incompetence of their officers and that too without taking any action against the concerned officers. No detail of this delay of 728 days have been given as if there is an inherent right to seek condonation of delay by State Government. The law of limitation apparently does not apply to the State Government according to its conduct. That such condonation of delay is no more admissible on the pretext of Government working lethargy is clear from the judgment of this court in The Chief Post Master General v. Living Media India Ltd. [2012 (3) S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
