Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 1 (1) Bilaspur (C.g v. Applicant(S
High Court
07 May 2025 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · cghccisdb
Parties
Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 1 (1) Bilaspur (C.g v. Applicant(S
Date of order
07 May 2025
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 1 (1) Bilaspur (C.g v. Applicant(S, the High Court (2025) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
Digitallysigned byADITIADITIDIWANDIWANKAIWARTKAIWARTDate:2025.05.0912:31:29+0530
(MCC No. 458 of 2025)
2025:CGHC:21295-DB
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPURMCC No. 458 of 2025
1 - Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 1 (1) Bilaspur (C.G.)
versus
--- Applicant(s)
1 - M/s South Eastern Coalfields Limited Seepat Road, Bilaspur(C.G.)
--- Non-applicant(s)
(Cause-title taken from the Case Information System)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------For Applicant:- Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Advocate
For Non-applicant :- Ms. Monika Singh, Advocate on behalf of
Mr. S. Rajeshwara Rao, Advocate.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Division Bench
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal andHon'ble Shri JusticeSanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Order on Board(08.05.2025)
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J
1. Heard on IA No.1, which is an application seekingcondonation of delay in filing the application for restorationof TAXC No.53/2022.condonation of delay in filing the application for restorationof TAXC No.53/2022.
2. In the considered opinion of this Court, sufficient cause
@d!t!
(MCC No. 458 of 2025)
has been shown by the applicant for the delay of 42 dayscaused in filing of this MCC and for not filing the paper-book within the stipulated time. Accordingly, I.A. No.1 isallowedand the delay is hereby condoned.
3. Also, heard on admission.
4. Admit.
5. Issue notice to the non-applicant.
6. Learned counsel for the non-applicant accepts notice onbehalf of the non-applicant.behalf of the non-applicant.
7. With the consent of the parties, heard finally.
8. This MCC has been filed seeking restoration of TAXCNo.53/2022, which was dismissed for non-compliance ofthis Court’s peremptory order dated 07.02.2025.No.53/2022, which was dismissed for non-compliance ofthis Court’s peremptory order dated 07.02.2025.
9. For the reasons stated in the application, the same isallowed. TAXC No.53/2022 is restored to its originalnumber for its hearing and disposal in accordance withlaw.allowed. TAXC No.53/2022 is restored to its originalnumber for its hearing and disposal in accordance withlaw.
10.Accordingly, this MCC is allowed.
Sd/-
Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal) (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
Judge Judge
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.