Back
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH)
C.N. Prasad, J.M., Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, A.M., Mahavir Singh, V.P.
ACIT – Appellant
Versus
M/S HIGHVISTA BUILDCON P. LTD. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. context of the appeal and factual background. (Para 1 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. challenges raised by the revenue and assessee. (Para 4 , 8) |
| 3. legal arguments surrounding service of notice. (Para 10 , 16) |
| 4. court's ruling on the validity of notice service. (Para 26 , 28) |
| 5. final verdict of the court. (Para 31) |
आदेश /ORDER
PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M.
-
This appeal and cross objection are filed by the Revenue and Assessee against the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)-32, New Delhi dated 15.12.2017 for the AY 2009-10.
2. The appeal of the Revenue is filed with a delay of 26 days and the Revenue has filed a petition for condonation of delay in filing the appeal requesting to condone the delay. On perusing the reasons for delay in filing it is observed that the files got misplaced along with project papers and therefore the appeal could not be filed in time by the Revenue. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee do not have any serious objection for condoning the delay of 26 days.
3. Considering the submissions of both the parties and the reasons for filing appeal with a delay of 26 days, we observe that Revenue has reasonable cause in filing the appeal belatedly. Thus, the delay is condoned.
4. The Revenue
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
