Itat/166/2012 Ia No: Ga/2/2012 (Old No. Ga/1928/2012) Binay Prakash v. Commissioner Of Income –Tax, Kolkata, Central Circle-Iii, Kolkata

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/166/2012 IA NO: GA/2/2012 (OLD NO. GA/1928/2012) BINAY PRAKASH Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME –TAX, KOLKATA, CENTRAL CIRCLE-III, KOLKATA BEFORE : THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 6[th] June, 2022. Appearance: Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. The Court : This appeal filed is time barred and an application for condonation of delay has been filed in GA 1927 of 2012. When the application for condonation of delay was heard by the Hon’ble Division Bench on 8[th] August 2012, a direction was issued to the appellant/assessee to pay cost of Rs.5,000/- to the respondent/department as a condition precedent for condonation of delay and such cost was directed to be paid within seven days from the date of the receipt of the copy of the order. Ms. Smita Das De, learned standing counsel appearing for the revenue has submitted that no proof has been filed by the appellant/assessee to establish that the cost has been paid. That apart, we find that the order dated 8[th] August, 2012 is a self-working order in the sense that if the cost was not paid the application as well as the appeal was dismissed. Thus, in the absence of compliance of direction issued by the Court in its earlier order, we have no other option except to dismiss the application for condonation of delay and consequently dismiss the appeal itself. Consequently, the stay application stands closed. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) S.pal/GH