Back
B. V. NAGARATHNA, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
Director Of Income Tax-II (International Taxation) – Appellant
Versus
Western Union Financial Services Inc. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. delay in refiling appeals detailed. (Para 3) |
| 2. arguments on merits and delay condonation. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's reasoning on delay and merits. (Para 6) |
| 4. decision to condone delay and allow appeals. (Para 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. final order and significance of compliance. (Para 12 , 13) |
ORDER :
Leave granted.
2. We have heard learned panel advocate for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents.
3. The grievance ventilated in these appeals is regarding the dismissal of the I.T.A.No.141/2016 and Miscellaneous application(s) as well as analogous appeals filed before the Delhi High Court only on the ground of inordinate delay of 1110, 1117 and 991 days respectively in refiling the said appeals. The High Court has observed that the explanation offered for the condonation of delay sought for by the appellant herein could not be accepted, as, for a long time the appeals were lying in defect and therefore could not be listed before the Court.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as a result, the substantial questions of law raised by the Department in the said appeals have not been considered on merits which has caused prejudice to the Revenue. He therefore
The failure to provide sufficient justification for extensive delays in legal proceedings demonstrates a lack of bona fide intentions and can result in denial of condonation, affirming the importance....
The principle of condonation of delay and the requirement for a substantial question of law to arise for consideration in an appeal.
Delays in filing appeals must be satisfactorily explained; inadequate reasons result in dismissal of applications for condonation.
The court has the discretion to allow condonation of delay in re-filing appeals and may grant liberty to file a writ petition based on previous judgments.
Condonation of delay is an equitable remedy requiring bona fide conduct. It cannot be granted when a litigant engages in tactical 'fence-sitting,' deliberately concealing the pendency of proceedings,....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
