Itat/103/2023 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Central 2 Kolkata v. M/S Electrosteel Castings Ltd
High Court
22 Nov 2023 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Itat/103/2023 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Central 2 Kolkata v. M/S Electrosteel Castings Ltd
Date of order
22 Nov 2023
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Itat/103/2023 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Central 2 Kolkata v. M/S Electrosteel Castings Ltd, the High Court (2023) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Therefore, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed and consequently, the appeal stands rejected.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
OD – 7
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax]
ORIGINAL SIDE
ITAT/103/2023 IA NO.GA/1/2023, GA/2/2023 PRINCPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-2, KOLKATA -Versus-
M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTINGS LTD.
BEFORE : THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYADate : 22[nd] November, 2023
Appearance :Mr.Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ...for the appellant. Mr.J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjay Bhaumik, Adv. Mr.Soumya Kejriwal, Adv. ..for the respondent.
The Court : This appeal has been filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenging the order passed by the Income Tax Apeplalte Tribunal, C-Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA/138/139/Kol/2018 for the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14. The revenue has raised several substantial questions of law for consideration.
This appeal has not been filed within the period of
limitation and there is a delay of 1365 days in filing the appeal. The order of the Tribunal dated 28[th] February, 2019 and the certified copy of the same was received by the department
on 25[th] March, 2019 and the appeal was filed before this Court on 18[th] April, 2023.
We have perused the averments contained in the condone delay petition and we find that sufficient cause has not been shown for the inordinate delay of 1365 days in filing the appeal. Therefore, we are not persuaded to exercise any discretion in favour of the appellant/revenue. Therefore, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed and consequently, the appeal stands rejected.
The substantial questions of law which have been raised by the revenue are left open and the dismissal of this appeal will not affect the merits of the appeal which is already pending before this Court in the assessee’s case and the cross-appeal which have been filed by the respondent/assessee.
Affidavit-in-opposition and the reply filed today are taken on record.
The stay application is also dismissed.
(CHIEF JUSTICE)
S.Das/
(SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA, 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.