Court dismisses motion to condone 171-day delay in setting aside orderCondonation of delay of 171 days - removal of office objections - Held that:- This application had came up earlier on 9th February, 2017. On that date, after the application was heard for some time, Ms. Divakar, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue took time to file further affidavit in support of the delay in taking out this Notice of Motion. Revenue has filed a further affidavit of Shri Puneetinder Singh Walia, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax dated 14th February, 2018. In the affidavit,... ... ... Issues: Condonation of delay in setting aside a self-operating order

Analysis:
The judgment by the High Court of Bombay pertains to a Notice of Motion seeking condonation of a 171-day delay in setting aside a self-operating order dated 5th January, 2017. The order directed the Applicant to address office objections by 2nd February, 2017, failing which the appeal would stand rejected under Rule 986 of the High Court (O.S.) Rules. The Applicant failed to comply with this directive, leading to the present application.

The application was initially heard on 9th February, 2017, during which Ms. Divakar, representing the Revenue, requested time to file a further affidavit explaining the delay. Subsequently, an affidavit was filed by Shri Puneetinder Singh Walia, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, dated 14th February, 2018, attempting to clarify the delay from 13th July, 2017, until the filing of the Motion on 22nd August, 2017. However, no explanation was provided for the delay between 22nd February, 2017, and 13th July, 2017, which remained unaddressed.

The court noted that the explanations provided by the Revenue for the delay were insufficient and lacked detail. The attempt to justify the delay was considered casual, with no substantial reasons presented. Consequently, the court found no valid grounds to condone the delay and dismissed the Notice of Motion seeking the setting aside of the self-operating order dated 5th January, 2017. Condonation of delay of 171 days - removal of office objections - Held that:- This application had came up earlier on 9th February, 2017. On that date, after the application was heard for some time, Ms. Divakar, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue took time to file further affidavit in support of the delay in taking out this Notice of Motion. Revenue has filed a further affidavit of Shri Puneetinder Singh Walia, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax dated 14th February, 2018. In the affidavit, they attempt to explain the delay from 13th July, 2017 till the date of filing the Motion on 22nd August, 2017. There is no attempt to explain the delay in taking out this application from 22nd February, 2017 to 13th July, 2017. We find that the earlier affidavit in support also does not give any explanation for not having moved this application earlier when undisputedly the Appeal stood dismissed on 2nd February, 2017. The attempt on the part of the Revenue to explain the delay is most casual. No explanation has been offered for the same. No reason has been made out to condone the delay Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central -3 Versus M/s. Maruti Impex
Income Tax
2018 (3) TMI 1663 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT - TMI
BOMBAY HIGH COURT - HC
Dated:- 9-3-2018
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1968 OF 2017 INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 1355 OF 2016 - -
Income Tax
M.S.SANKLECHA And SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ. Ms. Padma Divakar, for the Applicant/Appellant Mr. Rahul Hakani, for the Respondent ORDER P. C. This Notice of Motion has been taken out by the Applicant, seeking condonation of delay of 171 days in taking out the present application to set aside the self operating order dated 5th January, 2017 passed by the Prothonotary and Senior Master, High Court, Bombay. The impugned order dated 5th January, 2017 directed the Applicant to remove the office objections on or before 2nd February, 2017, failing which, Appeal would stands rejected under Rule 986 of the High Court (O.S.) Rules. This, the applicant failed to do. 2 This application had came up earlier on 9th February, 2017. On that date, after the application was heard for some time, Ms. Divakar, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue took time to file further affidavit in support of the delay in taking out this Notice of Motion. The Revenue has filed a further affidavit of Shri Puneetinder Singh Walia, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax dated 14th February, 2018. In the affidavit, they attempt to explain the delay from 13th July, 2017 till the date of filing the Motion on 22nd August, 2017. There is no attempt to explain the delay in taking out this application from 22nd February, 2017 to 13th July, 2017. 3 We find that the earlier affidavit in support also does not give any explanation for not having moved this application earlier when undisputedly the Appeal stood dismissed on 2nd February, 2017. 4 The attempt on the part of the Revenue to explain the delay is most casual. No explanation has been offered for the same. 5 We are of the view that no reason has been made out to condone the delay. Accordingly, Notice of Motion dismissed.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgements, Orders