Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 5,Kolkata v. Sri Vishal Garach
High Court
20 Dec 2022 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 5,Kolkata v. Sri Vishal Garach
Date of order
20 Dec 2022
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 5,Kolkata v. Sri Vishal Garach, the High Court (2022) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Consequently, the appeal stands rejected.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE
ITAT/138/2022 IA No. GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5,KOLKATA
VS
SRI VISHAL GARACH
BEFORE :
THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM
And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 20[th] December, 2022
Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv.
…for the appellant.
Mr.Karan Veer, Adv. Mr. Avra Mazumder, Adv.
…for the respondent.
The Court : We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant/revenue and Mr. Karan Veer, learned advocate for the respondent/assessee.
There is a delay of 952 days in filing the appeal.We have perused the
affidavit filed in support of the condone delay petition, affidavit-in-opposition as well as the reply affidavit of the revenue. We find neither in the condone delay petition nor in the reply affidavit, there is any satisfactory explanation for the inordinate delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, we are unable to persuade ourselves to exercise any discretion in favour of the appellant/revenue.
Hence, the application for condonation of delay being IA No.GA/1/2022 is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal stands rejected.
The application for stay being IA No.GA/2/2022 also stands dismissed. Affidavit-in-reply filed in Court today be kept on record.
(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, 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.