Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 5, Kolkata v. Rajesh Kumar Sarda Huf
High Court
02 Jan 2023 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 5, Kolkata v. Rajesh Kumar Sarda Huf
Date of order
02 Jan 2023
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 5, Kolkata v. Rajesh Kumar Sarda Huf, the High Court (2023) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTASPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)ORIGINAL SIDE
ITAT/114/2022IA NO: GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5, KOLKATA
VS.RAJESH KUMAR SARDA HUF
BEFORE :THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAMAndTHE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYADate : 2[nd] January, 2023
Appearance :Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv.…for appellant.Mr. Avra Mazumder, Adv.…for respondent.
The Court : - Heard respective counsel for the either side.
Perused the averments set out in the affidavit filed in support of the petition forcondonation of delay, the affidavit in opposition filed by the respondent as well as thereply filed by the revenue.
There is a delay of 958 days in filing the appeal.
On perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the condone delay application wefind that there is no acceptable reason given for the inordinate delay in filing the appeal.The averments set out in the reply by the revenue does not in any manner improve thecase of the revenue. Thus, we are satisfied that no sufficient explanation has beenshown by the appellant/revenue for not preferring the appeal within the period oflimitation.
Hence, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently, theappeal stands rejected.
(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)
(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.