Maninder Singh Riar (Through His Lr Ranjit Kaur v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax And Another

206IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA|AT CHANDIGARH he fCWP No. 25412 of 2018 (O&M)DECIDED ON:FEBRUARY 26, 2020 MANINDER SINGH RIAR (THROUGH HIS LR RANJIT KAUR) VERSUS PETITIONER PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARIHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGANHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Present:Mr. K.L. Goyal, Sr. Advocate with|Mr. Avneet Singh, advocatefor the petitioner. Mr. Vivek Sethi, Sr. Panel Counsel withMr. Varun Issar, Jr. Panel Counselfor the respondents. AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral): $$$$ This writ petition has been filed challenging the action of therespondents for not condoning the delay of 400 odd days. The ground takenwas that the deceased-petitioner was preventive by ill-health, ?DWritten statement filed on behalf of respondent No.1 is taken onrecord. Copy supplied to the counsel opposite. | 3,The medical record reveals that the deceased-petitioner was analcoholic who struggled with alcohol for many years before passing away inthe year 2018. 4In the circumstances, it is hard to come to the conclusion that hewas preventive by illness. However, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner States that the family of the deceased is ready to pay450,000/- as costs butthe revision should be heard on merits. CWP No. 25412 of 2018 (O&M) 5 In this view of the matter we do not deem appropriate to deny the prayer. 6 In the circumstances, the petition is allowed in the above-said terms. TiSince the main petition is allowed, all the pending civil misc. applications if any, are also disposed of. IAJAY TEWARI]JUDGE JIAVNEESH JHINGANJUDGE FEBRUARY 26, 2020 sham 1. Whether speaking/ reasonedYes/No2. Whether reportableYes/No