2024 (5) TMI 230

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y in refiling the appeal is condoned. The application is disposed of accordingly. OMP(M) No. 14/2023 This application is filed seeking condonation of delay of 1085 days in filing the appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 challenging the order dt. 11.10.2019 passed in M.A. 99/Chd/2019 filed in ITA No. 885/Chd/2017 for the assessment year 2012-2013. 2. From the facts narrated by the applicant, it appears that the assessing officer initially passed an order on 30.01.2015 under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 and assessed the income of the respondent-assessee at Rs. 4,40,99,840/-. 3. This was challenged in an appeal by the respondent and the said appeal was partly allowed on 30.03.2017 by the Commissioner ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lful nor intentional. 11. We may point out that Income Tax Appeal No. 10/2019 had no doubt become infructuous in view of modification of the order challenged therein (dt. 06.12.2018) by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal by passing a fresh order on 11.10.2019. 12. The appellant had a right to question the order passed on 11.10.2019, by filing appeal under Section 260-A of the Act, within the period of 120 days prescribed under the Income Tax Act. 13. The said period ended on 08th February, 2020. Thereafter from around 15th March, 2020 the Covid Pandemic started, and in view of the same, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its order dt. 10.01.2022 titled Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation directed that the period from 15.03.2020 til....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ly show that there was delay at every stage and except mentioning the dates of receipt of the file and the decision taken, there is no explanation as to why such delay had occasioned. Though it was stated by the Department that the delay was due to unavoidable circumstances and genuine difficulties, the fact remains that from day one the Department or the person/persons concerned have not evinced diligence in prosecuting the matter to this Court by taking appropriate steps. 27. It is not in dispute that the person(s) concerned were well aware or conversant with the issues involved including the prescribed period of limitation for taking up the matter by way of filing a special leave petition in this Court. They cannot claim that th....