Income Tax Officer, Ward-40(1), Kolkata v. Sudha Devi Prahaladka
High Court
16 Jan 2024 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_appellate_side
Parties
Income Tax Officer, Ward-40(1), Kolkata v. Sudha Devi Prahaladka
Date of order
16 Jan 2024
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Income Tax Officer, Ward-40(1), Kolkata v. Sudha Devi Prahaladka, the High Court (2024) 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.
Sections referenced in this judgment
16.01.2024Item No.06 RP/AN Ct. No.1
MAT 1471 of 2023
+
IA No.CAN 1 of 2023
CAN 2 of 2023
Income Tax Officer, Ward-40(1), Kolkata Vs.Sudha Devi Prahaladka
Mr. P. Dudheria
…..for the Appellant
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra Mr. Sutritha Das
…..for the Respondent
1.There is a delay of 304 days in filing the appeal. Wehave perused the affidavit filed in support of theapplication for condonation of delay. We find thatsufficient cause has been shown for not preferringthe appeal within the period of limitation. Hence,the application for condonation of delay is allowedand delay is condoned.have perused the affidavit filed in support of theapplication for condonation of delay. We find thatsufficient cause has been shown for not preferringthe appeal within the period of limitation. Hence,the application for condonation of delay is allowedand delay is condoned.
2.We have heard the learned advocates for the parties.
3. This intra-Court appeal preferred by the Income TaxDepartment is directed against the 2[nd] September,2022 passed in WPA 19543 of 2022. Therespondent/writ petitioner had challenged the noticedated 29[th] May, 2022 issued under Section 148 ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961. The learned SingleBench, on going through the factual details, hasrecorded a finding that the notice issued is clearlyDepartment is directed against the 2[nd] September,2022 passed in WPA 19543 of 2022. Therespondent/writ petitioner had challenged the noticedated 29[th] May, 2022 issued under Section 148 ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961. The learned SingleBench, on going through the factual details, hasrecorded a finding that the notice issued is clearly
barred by the laws of limitation in view of the firstproviso to Section 149(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act,1961. Before us the appellant department has notbeen able to controvert the said factual aspect.Thus, we find no grounds to interfere with the orderpassed by the learned Single Bench. Hence, theappeal and the connected application fail and aredismissed.
(T. S. SIVAGNANAM)
CHIEF JUSTICE
(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, 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.