Court directs appellant to provide instructions on appeal against tribunal's order

The High Court of Calcutta considered the issue of condonation of delay in filing an appeal by the appellant/department due to tax implications. The court directed the appellant to provide specific instructions regarding any appeal filed against the tribunal's order for the relevant assessment year. Additionally, the court addressed allegations in an affidavit-in-opposition by an accountant working with the respondent/assessee, expressing dissatisfaction with the language used and highlighting discrepancies. The court deferred stringent measures pending the withdrawal of the affidavit and an apology, adjourning the matter for further proceedings.

---

---

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing an appeal by the appellant/department.
2. Allegations made in the affidavit-in-opposition by the deponent, an accountant working with the respondent/assessee.

Analysis:
1. The High Court of Calcutta considered the issue of condonation of delay of 535 days in filing an appeal by the appellant/department. The court noted that the appellant did not prefer an appeal due to the tax effect for the assessment year 2008-09 being Rs.30,42,105, in accordance with a Circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT). The court examined the application seeking condonation of delay and directed the appellant to provide specific instructions regarding any appeal filed against the tribunal's order for the said assessment year. After considering the matter at length, the court adjourned the case for further proceedings.

2. The court also addressed the allegations made in the affidavit-in-opposition by Mr. Deepak Kumar Pathre, an accountant working with the respondent/assessee. The court expressed dissatisfaction with the language and tone used in the affidavit, noting that certain averments were in bad taste. The deponent's statements were found to be derogatory towards the standing counsel for the appellant/department, using terms like "wholly false, untenable, and mala fide." The court highlighted discrepancies in the affidavit, such as incorrect dates mentioned in the petition for condonation of delay. The court indicated its intention to take action against the deponent but decided to defer any stringent measures upon the respondent/assessee's assurance to withdraw the affidavit and tender an apology. The court adjourned the matter, awaiting the submission of a new affidavit from the respondent/assessee and Mr. Deepak Kumar Pathre by the next hearing date on 10th May 2022.

---