Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Central Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Marg, Patna … v. M/S. Gahna, Check Post Chas, Bokaro…

High Court 07 Mar 2024 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · jhar_pg
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Central Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Marg, Patna … v. M/S. Gahna, Check Post Chas, Bokaro…
Date of order
07 Mar 2024
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Central Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Marg, Patna … v. M/S. Gahna, Check Post Chas, Bokaro…, the High Court (2024) allowed the appeal under Section 5 of the Income-tax Act. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: Accordingly, the instant Civil Miscellaneous Petition stands disposed of. [SECTION] ## (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) [SECTION] ## (Arun Kumar Rai, J.)

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHIC.M.P. No. 13 of 2017 ----- The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Central Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Marg, Patna … PetitionerVersus M/s. Gahna, Check Post Chas, Bokaro… Opp. Party ------- CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI ------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Om Prakash, Advocate : For the Opp. Party ------ Order No. 06/Dated 07[th]March, 2024 I.A. No. 2093 of 2024 1.This interlocutory application has been preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 06 days in preferring this Civil Miscellaneous Petition. 2.Heard the parties. 3.Having regard to the averments made in the application and submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, we are of the view that the petitioner was prevented from sufficient cause in filing the appeal within the period of limitation. As such, the delay of 06 days in preferring the instant petition is hereby condoned. 4.I.A. No. 2093 of 2024 stands allowed. C.M.P. No. 13 of 2017 5. The instant application has been filed for restoration of Tax Appeal No. 18 of 2016, which was dismissed for non-compliance of pre-emptory order dated 22.11.2016. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Tax Appeal No. 18 of 2016, which was dismissed for default vide order dated 22.11.2022, may be restored to its original file otherwise the petitioner may suffer irreparable loss and injury. This Court, after having heard the learned counsel for the parties, considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and the reason assigned in the instant Civil Miscellaneous petition, deems it fit and proper to restore Tax Appeal No. 18 of 2016, which was dismissed for default vide order dated 22.11.2022, to its original file. In view thereof, Tax Appeal No. 18 of 2016 is restored to its original file, subject to removal of surviving defects within two weeks from today. Accordingly, the instant Civil Miscellaneous Petition stands disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Arun Kumar Rai, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan