Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Airport Authority Of India
High Court
29 Apr 2016 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Airport Authority Of India
Date of order
29 Apr 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Airport Authority Of India, the High Court (2016) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
2. + ITA 272/2016
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
..... Appellant Through: Mr. P. Roy Chaudhuri, Senior Standing counsel.
versus
AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA
..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Pranjal Srivastava, Advocate.
CORAM:
JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R% 29.04.2016
CM No. 14806/2016 (for exemption)
1. Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
ITA 272/2016 & CM No. 14805/2016 (for condonation of delay of 1409 -days in refiling the appeal)
2. There is an inordinate delay of 1409 days in re-filing the appeal.
3. The Court finds that the standard excuse that the department is putting forth in all such applications for condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal is regarding the practice directions issued by the Court pertaining to filing of soft copies of the paperbooks in tax matters.
4. As regards this ground, sufficient advance notice had been given to the litigants and Advocates about the filing of soft copies of the paperbooks. Further, the Registry of the Court had made appropriate arrangements for scanning services at the filing counters to facilitate the making of soft copies so that the inconvenience, if any, caused to the Advocates and the litigants is minimised. In any event the change could not have entailed a delay of more than three years.
5. It is not possible to accept that no one followed up on the filing of appeals and allowed a period of more than three and a half years to elapse before the appeal could be re-filed. The Department has a cell in the High Court which is under the supervision of a Deputy CIT. He ought to be keeping track of the filing of appeals and should be able to know if any appeal entrusted to the panel counsel for filing has not been listed even once before the Court for a long time.
6. The application bearing CM No.14805/2016 for condonation of the delay of 1409 days in re-filing the appeal is dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
S. MURALIDHAR, J
APRIL 29, 2016/dn
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.