Income Tax Officer … Applicant (International Taxation v. Miscellaneous Civil Application

Esha IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 162 OF 2024INTAX APPEAL NO. 2593 OF 2023 (F) INCOMETAXOFFICER… APPLICANT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) VersusM/S SHREE BALAJI CONCEPTS… RESPONDENT*** Ms. Susan Linhares, Standing Counsel for the Applicant. Mr. Hanumant D. Naik, Advocate for the Respondent. CORAM:BHARATI DANGRE &ASHISH SAHADEV CHAVAN, JJ.DATED:3[rd] SEPTEMBER 2025 P.C: 1.Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 162 of 2024 seekcondonation of delay of 373 days in filing the present Appeal,raising a challenge to the order dated 13.05.2022 passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal. 2.We have heard Ms. Linhares for the Applicant and perusedthe Application. 3.The Application attribute the delay caused due to procedural difficulties in obtaining the approval for filing the Tax Appeal andthe Application specifically plead thus: “4. The Applicant states that certified copy of theimpugned Order dated 13.05.2022 was received by theoffice of the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT)International Taxation, Bangalore on 01.07.2022.Thereafter on 13.07.2022 the Pr. Commissioner ofIncome Tax (OSD) (International Taxation) atBengaluru, forwarded the same to the office of theDCIT (IT), Circle 2(1), Bangalore calling for scrutinyreport. However, inadvertently the same was notforwarded to the ITO (IT) Panaji at the same time.Due to this lapse, there was delay in submitting thescrutiny report by the ITO(IT), Panaji. 5. The Applicant states that on receiving theScrutiny report from the ITO(IT) Panaji, Goa, theoffice of the Joint Commissioner (InternationalTaxation) Bengaluru vide letter date 08.08.2023forwarded the file to the Pr. CIT (OSD), (InternationalTaxation), Bengaluru. 6. The Applicant states that 11.08.2023, the letterdated 08.08.2023 and file was put up by the ACIT tothe CIT for perusal and approval. The Office of the CIT(Int. Taxn.) Bengaluru vide letter dated 14.08.2023put up the file to the Chief Commissioner of IncomeTax, South Zone, Bangalore for proposal for filingfurther appeal to the High Court. On 28.08.2023, theCIT (IT) put up this notings and the file was put up tothe CCIT(IT) SZ for necessary approval for filingappeal to the High Court. The CCIT(IT)SZ approvedthe proposal for filing the appeal on 28.08.2023. 7. The Applicant states that the file was thereafterput up to the DGIT (Inv.) for necessary concurrencefor filing appeal to the High Court, which was agreedto on 29.08.2023. Thereafter, the ACIT (HQ) videletter put up the file to the Pr.CIT (Int. Taxn.),Bengaluru for approval for further appeal before theHon'ble High Court. 8. The Applicant states vide letter dated 05.10.2023,the office of the CIT (Int.Taxn) Benglore authorizedthe Standing Counsel to file the appeal. The casepapers for filing the Tax Appeal was received by theStanding Counsel on 25.10.2023 by post. Thereafter,the Tax Appeal came to be drafted and filed on06.11.2023.” 4.The Application is strongly opposed by Mr. Naikrepresenting the Respondent and he would in specific, invite ourattention to paragraph 9 of the appeal memo where certaindifferent dates are given. According to him, the statements madein paragraph 9 of the Application are incorrect and in his words“false”. 5.However, we have considered the said submission, but whatwe find is that the Application has given specific reasons inparagraphs 4 to 7 and we find the reasons to be justifiable as it isfor some administrative reasons that the delay has occasioned,which in our opinion deserve to be condoned. In any case, it isopen for the Assessee/Respondent to contest the Appeal on meritsand therefore, in the interest of the Revenue, which involve largerpublic interest, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay. The Miscellaneous Civil Application is made absolute interms of its prayer clause. 5.However, we have considered the said submission, but whatwe find is that the Application has given specific reasons inparagraphs 4 to 7 and we find the reasons to be justifiable as it isfor some administrative reasons that the delay has occasioned,which in our opinion deserve to be condoned. In any case, it isopen for the Assessee/Respondent to contest the Appeal on meritsand therefore, in the interest of the Revenue, which involve largerpublic interest, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay. The Miscellaneous Civil Application is made absolute interms of its prayer clause. 6.We direct the listing of the Appeal for hearing on10.09.2025. ASHISH SAHADEV CHAVAN, J.BHARATI DANGRE, J.