Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Rajiv Shakdher, Girish Kathpalia, JJ.
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-7 – Appellant
Versus
Sumitomo Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
ITA 119 of 2023 & CM APPL. 10173 of 2023 & ITA 121 of 2023 & CM APPL. 10177 of 2023
Decided On : 13-07-2023
Condonation of Delay - Income Tax Appeals - The court allowed the condonation of delay in filing the appeals by the appellant/revenue. The appeals concerned Assessment Year 2016-17 and 2015-16, and the court found no substantial question of law arising from the issues considered, leading to the closure of the appeals.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant/revenue sought condonation of delay of 214 days in filing the appeals concerning Assessment Year 2016-17 and 2015-16.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the condonation of delay and closed the appeals, finding no substantial question of law arising from the issues considered.
Issues: Delay in filing the appeals, challenge to a common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, and absence of substantial question of law.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the absence of substantial question of law arising from the issues considered in the appeals.
Final Decision: The appeals were closed by the court due to the absence of substantial question of law arising from the issues considered.
JUDGMENT
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 10173/2023 in ITA 119/2023
CM APPL. 10177/2023 in ITA 121/2023 [Applications filed on behalf of the appellant/revenue seeking condonation of delay of 214 days in filing the appeals]
1. These are the applications moved on behalf of the appellant/revenue seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeals.
1.1 According to the appellant/revenue, there is a delay of 214 days in filing the appeals.
2. Mr C.S. Aggarwal, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondent/assessee, says that he does not oppose the prayer made in the applications.
3. Accordingly, the prayers made therein are allowed.
4. The applications are disposed of, in the aforesaid terms.
ITA 119/2023 & ITA 121/2023
5. These appeals concern Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17 (ITA No. 119/2023) and AY 2015-16 (ITA No. 121/2023).
6. The appellant/revenue has laid challenge to a common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, `Tribunal'] dated 24.11.2021.
7. In the connected appeals which were listed on our board today i.e. ITA 22/2023, ITA 23/2023 and ITA 122/2023, we have noticed that in the earlier AYs i.e. 2007-08 to 2010-11, this court had passed a remand-order dated 22.07.2016.
8. Upon the High Court passing the order of remand, the Tribunal rendered a decision on 22.10.2018.
9. The appellant/revenue, for whatever reason, chose not to file an appeal against the said order.
10. Since the issues which arise for consideration in the instant appeals are in our view, pari materia, no substantial question of law arises.
11. The above-captioned appeals are, accordingly, closed.
The absence of substantial question of law can lead to the closure of appeals.
The principle of condonation of delay and the requirement for a substantial question of law to arise for consideration in an appeal.
The court has the discretion to condone delay in re-filing appeals and may rely on previous decisions to close appeals.
The court's decision emphasized that no substantial question of law arose for consideration, leading to the dismissal of the appeals.
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.
The court's decision was influenced by the absence of incriminating material in the mentioned Assessment Years and the coverage of the issue by the judgment of the coordinate bench of the Court and t....
The court has the discretion to condone delay and may dispose of appeals with a caveat for further steps against the respondent/assessee in case of any deletion of substantial additions.
The court's decision was based on the lack of substantial question of law arising for consideration and the coverage of the issue by a previous court decision.
The court's decision was influenced by its previous ruling on a similar issue, indicating the importance of consistency in judicial decisions.
The court's decision was based on the absence of a substantial question of law for consideration in the appeal.
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
