Rewonden‘w v. Assisiamcemmi‘sséome? 0F Mceme Taxcércip’s€{1},[Raipur

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARHAT BILASPURmv§ama §2w§§¥Tax CaseNOH/2007 mv§ama §2w§§¥ :rvShri. Harilal Ravilal Tonk Prop.aggellant/M/s. H.R. Construction Ravi sadan,Ravi Nagar Raipur.r.Circle1Respondenti/éxsswtantCommisswnerOf Income1(1) Haiour.v‘Tax Case Income Tax appeal u s 260 A of Income Tax Act1961.-m_-,.--...u._IJwinthQAxio H§GH COURT OF Ci“§HATT!SGARH : BILA$PUR BIsicnV§ Beach:Hcn’kie 8M1 Satis’n K. #xgmhui‘ri &Hen’bka Shri Mamndra Mchan Shrivasmva, JJw Tax {Ease Nam of 2&3? AmeHan‘: 3m 5iari§a§ Rawial Tami Rewonden‘w Versus AssisiamCemmi‘sséome? 0f mceme TaxCércip’s€{1},[Raipur.] {mcome[Tax][ Appeal]under $ectixm 260 A af the imome Ta_x #ci, 196?) Preeent:-SimEShashafikDubey,55a“..Aevoca‘iewithShy?{3.3mBewangam Advecete fei‘ the epeeigent.Bewangam Advecete fei‘ the epeeigent. §rumRejeevShrivae’iava,Advccatew§thMsV.SmadhaV[mega,]D[ Awocage][ far]the mgpcaden‘z. GRL‘ER {OR§\L}{Passw[cm]t’is‘8tf‘a3! c? Febmaa'y, 29m $er Saiish K. Aqnihcatri J. ’1. Teeaepeaanihasereferredi‘nie‘appea§Lime!$ec$§en269A(Ifi’neincomew:a‘x Act wm{fer[emn]“theAct,196?}aiongwiihsepaz’a’zeappSieeiion($.A.Nc.’iof2CD?)Lame?Section § of iheLémiiation Aci fer eemienationof deiay m fiimgthemsierzi aepeaé,ae thisappeai hasbeeiipreferredafterfinepfesmbedperiodcf§5mitaiimm7wi){:iaysfromihedateanwhich ihe mdei appeamd agamst waS receivee by t?1e agpeiiai‘xtas pmviSeé unéea' $eciim 28Gi—K sub-secimrs (2) e§1he Act 2. At mi; very Outsei, Smi Duisey, §eamed semaf ceun5e§ aeeearmger; beha§f er the aepegan‘t} Very famy eubmiis fhai in mew e‘f iheeedeicnof WeCamireades’ee’inAssisz‘arif'Cemmi’sefeeercf )§§ \ Gem's \A 3 mcome Tax, Cfmiei,Ehiiai v1 Sfm’ Mahaw Prasad Varma" andothe.’ cannected maitersg whereby t§qe aweaks mefen'ed bevendéhe weScr‘abed pemad of 120 days Linda! Seciicn 2-‘3SA o?['ihe]Act‘19’5'§ have beer» ciésmissed an me ground of iimitatian‘‘Gn carefu§ consia'erai'ion.ii is faumi that me i'ssue G? caadanaiim"i961m deiay m an appea? undef Sedxian 260A of ihe Act,a'fta‘the staiutory' pefiod of €20 days is n5 kmger res ml‘egi’a in wemf*iheofdeciskm9fims53mm{endémdmAssisfam‘Commissianer of mwme Tax (supra),Accordmgiy, ihe appeaiis dismi$sed beingbar§‘eé”by'iimi’{a’:§on. 3. 4. Ne erder asio co‘ts. Sd/—Manindra Mohan[Shrivastava]‘Judge 1\ VSd/_Satish K.AgnihotriiJudgeiJudgei é''iax Tax Case imcomeri‘ppeaé) No.2131 2&7decided on[”s6—6—‘2OOE]