| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 0312 (Bom-HC) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 260A
Since no explanation for delay of 1371 days was provided by Revenue and if for all these years Revenue officials have not noticed the lodging, filing or pendency of an appeal, conditional order of the Registry, therefore delay could not be condoned.
|
Appeal (High Court) - Non-removal of office objections - Condonation of 286 days -
These three Notices of Motion have been taken out by Revenue before this Court seeking condonation of delay of 286 days in seeking to set aside the self-operating order passed by Prothonotary & Senior Master, rejecting assessee's appeal for non-removal of office objections under rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules. Held: There was no explanation for delay of 1371 days and if for all these years Revenue officials have not noticed the lodging, filing or pendency of an appeal, conditional order of the Registry, then, it must set its own house in order by sacking and removing the delinquent and negligent officials or penalizing them otherwise so as to sub-serve larger public interest. Therefore, delay could not be condoned.
REFERRED : CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2017) 84 taxmann.com 313 (Bom) : 2017 TaxPub(DT) 3943 (Bom-HC)
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour
A.Y. :
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|