Nma/1245/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -City-3 Mumbai v. Shri Daulat J. Rmsinghani

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1245 OF 2009 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1245 OF 2009 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1245 OF 2009 WITH WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.1081 OF 2008 INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.1081 OF 2008 The Comissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. Shri Daulat J.Ramsinghani ..Respondent. Mr.Vimal Gupta for appellant. Mr.J.D.Mistry with Atul Jasani for respondent. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 29TH APRIL, 2009. P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the revenue. In the affidavit in support of the Notice of Motion affirmed by Mr.Sujit Kumar, DCIT-3(3), Mumbai it is stated that the delay is of 55 days. However, Mr.Mistry learned counsel appearing for the respondent / assessee pointed out that the delay has been wrongly calculated and on proper calculation, the delay would not be less that 500 days. No sufficient cause is shown for condoning the delay of about 500 days. At this juncture, it is relevant to mention that the affidavit makes misleading statement of delay of 55 - = : 2 : = - days. As a matter of fact, a person who is supposed to know how the limitation is to be calculated was not expected to make such an incorrect and false statement. For all these reasons, the motion for condonation of delay is rejected. However, we put the officer on notice that in future such misleading statement will not be accepted. 2. Learned counsel on behalf of the revenue undertakes to communicate this order to the concerned officer. 3. Notice of Motion is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. 4. In view of dismissal of the notice of motion, the appeal shall also stand dismissed. (V.C.DAGA, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)