Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Calcutta High Court

Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Dipak Kumar Naha on 25 March, 2009

Author: Kalidas Mukherjee

Bench: Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, Kalidas Mukherjee

                                     1


ORDER SHEET
                       IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                     SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)
                               ORIGINAL SIDE

                           G. A. No. 333 of 2009
                          I. T. A. No. 31 of 2009

              Commissioner of Income Tax, Kol - II, Kolkata
                                   Versus
                              Dipak Kumar Naha

                                             Mr. R. Mitra, Advocate with
                                                Md. Nizumuddin, Advocate
                                              Mr. S. S. Sarkar, Advocate
                                                     . for the appellant
                                               Ms. A. Banerjee, Advocate
                                                    . for the respondent

BEFORE :

The Hon'ble Justice Subhro Kamal Mukherjee And The Hon'ble Justice Kalidas Mukherjee ___________________________________________________________ Date: 25.03.2009 ___________________________________________________________ This is an application for condonation of delay of 52 days in filing the appeal.
Mr. Mitra, learned advocate appearing in support of the application for condonation of delay, submits that due to departmental paraphernalia, the appeal could not be presented in time.
Ms. Banerjee, learned advocate appearing for the assessee, strongly opposes the prayer for condonation of delay. 2
Upon hearing Mr. Mitra and considering the averments contained in the application for condonation of delay, we are satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time and, therefore, the delay of 52 days in filing the appeal is condoned.
Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay stands allowed.
We direct the parties to bear their respective costs of this application for condonation of delay.
The office is directed to register the appeal, if the appeal is otherwise in form.
As prayed for by Mr. Mitra, put up this matter for admission on April 1, 2009.
( Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J. ) ( Kalidas Mukherjee, J. ) AKGoswami