2021 (6) TMI 589

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ma Singh and Mr. Madhur Jain, Advs Respondents: Mr. Bhagwan Shukla, CGSC, Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocate along with Mr. Shlok Chandra, Ms. Mansie Jain and Mr.Shrey Chakrobatry, Advs. RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. 1. Mr. Shlok Chandra, who appears for respondent no.2/revenue, which is the contesting respondent, says that he does not wish to file a counter-affidavit and will argue in the matter on the ba....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....021 required the petitioner to file its response by 23:59 hours on 26.04.2021. 1.3 Mr. Jain says that the petitioner made a request for adjournment on 26.04.2021 via the revenue‟s e-portal. Mr. Jain states, accommodation of fifteen days was sought, as Delhi was in lockdown since 19.04.2021, due to which the assessee was not able to access his records. 1.4 Besides this, Mr. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to in our order dated 10.05.2021, are not in dispute. In any case, since the assertions made in the writ petition are supported by an affidavit, we would have to accept the same as being correct in view of the counter-affidavit not having been filed by the respondents. 3. Thus, the crux of the matter is: whether the timeframe granted to file reply/objections to the show cause notice-cum-draft ....