Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-1, Kolkata v. Ratan Kumar Somani

OD-13&14 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTASPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/171/2018 IA NO:GA/1/2018 [OLD NO:GA/1217/2018] PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, KOLKATAVS.RATAN KUMAR SOMANI ……… ITAT/171/2018IA NO:GA/2/2018 [OLD NO:GA/1224/2018] PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, KOLKATAVS.RATAN KUMAR SOMANI ……… PRESENT:THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAMAndTHE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA14[th] February, 2022.[Video Conference] Mr. S. N. Dutta, Adv…for appellant. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate,Ms. Swapna Das, Adv.,Mr. Pityush Jhunjhunwalla, Advs. for respondent. The Court: We have heard Mr. Dutta, learned senior standing counselfor the appellant/revenue and Mr. J. P. Khaitan, senior counsel assisted byMs. Swapna Das and Mr. Pityush Jhunjhunwalla for the respondent. There is a delay of 545 days in filing the appeal. An affidavit of servicehas been filed by the respondent/assessee. We have perused the avermentsset out in the condone delay petition and we find that there is no acceptableexplanation for inordinate delay of 545 days in filing the appeal. Even going by the statements given by the deponent, who has sworn in the affidavit filed insupport of the condone delay petition, the delay of nearly 17 months remainsunexplained. We can take judicial notice of the fact that invariably, appealsfiled by the revenue before this Court are grossly delayed. In certain caseswhen the assessee do not seriously raise objection to the delay in filing theappeal, we have exercised discretion and condoned the delay. However, incases where the assessee raised objection by filing an affidavit in opposition,we are required to consider whether sufficient cause has been shown in notpreferring the appeal within the period of limitation. We are of the view thatthe procedure adopted by the Income Tax Department in the matter of filingthe appeal under Section 260A has substantially contributed to the delay infiling the appeals in several cases. We came to understand that in the otherStates in the matter of filing appeals by the Income Tax Department aseparate machinery, has been created in the Income Tax Department,however, in the State of West Bengal it appears that the appeals are filedthrough Ministry of Law. This has invariably contributed to the delay. It is notclear as to why the uniform procedure adopted in the other States have notbeen followed in the State of West Bengal, by the Income Tax Department. Bethat as it may, assuming what has been said to be correct in the affidavit filedin support of the condone delay petition, the Memorandum of Appeal, StayPetition and condone delay petition was ready on 31.10.2017 and received bythe Income Tax Department on 7.11.2012 but the appeal was filed only on15.5.2018, which is more than six months after all the appeal documentswere ready. This delay has not been explained as well as the delay, which has occasioned earlier, that is, for a period of six months. Therefore, we are of theview that diligent steps are not being taken by the department in preferringthe appeal. Therefore, we find no reason to exercise discretion to condone thedelay. Accordingly, the application, IA NO:GA/1/2018 [OLDNO:GA/1217/2018] is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal stands rejected.Affidavit in opposition filed in court today be kept with the record. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) pkd/spalAR(CR)