Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI • Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions • Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations • Issue-wise legal analysis • Practical arguments and supporting content • Professionally structured draft ready for further review.
Petition Dismissed for Unjustifiable Delay in Challenging Order Under Section 264 of Income Tax Act After 8 Years The HC dismissed the writ petition (WPA 4082 of 2021) challenging the order under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act due to an eight-year delay. The ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Petition Dismissed for Unjustifiable Delay in Challenging Order Under Section 264 of Income Tax Act After 8 Years
The HC dismissed the writ petition (WPA 4082 of 2021) challenging the order under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act due to an eight-year delay. The petitioner attributed the delay to mistakenly filing an appeal before the Tribunal, which was dismissed in 2014. The court found the delay unjustifiable, emphasizing that writ courts are for those who are vigilant in asserting their rights. The court noted that the petitioner had an opportunity to be heard before the impugned order was passed but failed to utilize it, further justifying the dismissal.
Issues: Challenging an order under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act after a significant delay.
Analysis: The petitioner challenged an order dated 26th February, 2013, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, after a delay of eight years. The petitioner claimed that the delay was due to mistakenly filing an appeal before the Tribunal against the assessment order in question. However, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal on 25th September, 2014. The court noted that even if the explanation for the delay was accepted, the time consumed by the petitioner in pursuing the appeal was significant, leading to a delay of almost seven years in approaching the writ court. The court emphasized that the delay itself was sufficient grounds for refusing to entertain the writ petition. The petitioner's attempt to justify the delay by referring to specific paragraphs in the writ petition was not accepted by the court. The court highlighted that the writ court is a court of equity meant for those who are vigilant and diligent in asserting their rights, not for those who neglect or delay in doing so. Additionally, the court observed that the impugned order dated 26th February, 2013, was passed after giving the petitioner an opportunity to be heard, but the petitioner did not avail that opportunity and instead sought further adjournment.
Therefore, considering the significant delay in approaching the court, the High Court dismissed the writ petition (WPA 4082 of 2021) challenging the order passed under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
