TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal Dismissed for Late Filing: No Condonation Beyond Prescribed Period</h1> <h3>SUKHVINDER SINGH Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) AND ANOTHER </h3> SUKHVINDER SINGH Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) AND ANOTHER - [2010] 322 ITR 339 (P&H) Issues:Challenge to order dated July 4, 2008, passed by the Income tax Appellate Tribunal regarding assessment year 2004-05. Determination of whether delay in filing the appeal beyond the prescribed period could be condoned by invoking section 5 of the Limitation Act.Analysis:Issue 1: Challenge to Tribunal's OrderThe appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 contested the order of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal dated July 4, 2008, regarding the assessment year 2004-05. The primary question before the court was whether the delay in filing the appeal beyond the specified 120 days could be excused by utilizing section 5 of the Limitation Act.Issue 2: Condonation of DelayThe appellant also submitted an application invoking section 5 of the Limitation Act to request condonation of a 2-day delay in filing the appeal. The court referred to a Supreme Court judgment in Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise v. Hongo India, which established that in the presence of a special law providing for limitation, the provisions of the Limitation Act may not apply. The court highlighted that the Income-tax Act, similar to the Excise Act, does not contain provisions for condonation of delay beyond the prescribed period.Issue 3: Legislative ProvisionsUpon examining sections 143(1), 249(3), and 260A(2)(a) of the Income-tax Act, the court noted that specific provisions for condonation of delay are included where necessary. The absence of such provisions implied that the Act itself serves as a comprehensive code, akin to the Excise Act, as interpreted by the Supreme Court. Consequently, the court held that the application seeking condonation of delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act could not be entertained.Conclusion:Based on the above analysis, the court dismissed the application seeking condonation of the 2-day delay in filing the appeal. Consequently, the appeal itself was deemed time-barred and was dismissed accordingly. The judgment reaffirmed that in the absence of specific provisions for condonation of delay in the Income-tax Act, applications under the Limitation Act cannot be accepted, aligning with the principles established by the Supreme Court in similar cases.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
