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 1, Cited by 2]

Calcutta High Court

C.W.T.Iii Kolkata vs I.T.C. Ltd on 18 November, 2014

Author: Manjula Chellur

Bench: Manjula Chellur

                                  AWT 6 of 2004
                                G.A.1395 of 2004

                         IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                       Special Jurisdiction (Wealth Tax)
                                 Original Side

                                C.W.T.III KOLKATA
                                      Versus
                                   I.T.C. LTD.

BEFORE:

The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. MANJULA CHELLUR

The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE

Date : 18th November, 2014.



           For the Appellant        : Mr. M.P.Agarwal, Sr.Advocate

           For the Respondent :         Mrs. Nilanjana Pal, Advocate

THE COURT : Though appeal came to be filed way back in 2004 under the nomenclature of Income-tax Appeal, it was to be Wealth Tax Appeal. Ultimately, we have to consider the application for condonation of delay when G.A. 1395 of 2004 came to be filed. It seems there was delay of 121 days in filing the appeal. As the matter can be disposed of ultimately on merit, we are of the opinion, no prejudice would be caused to the respondent if the delay is condoned. Accordingly, we condone the delay. G.A.No.1395 of 2004 is disposed of. 2 Mr. M.P.Agarwal, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant submits that another order of the Tribunal passed earlier is the subject matter of another appeal being I.T.A.357 of 2000 (C.W.T.WB-III vs. I.T.C.Ltd.) pending before this Court wherein similar issue is raised. Hence, list both the appeals for analogous hearing on the same point of law. This appeal is admitted.

Let informal paper books be filed by the appellant in the Department within eight weeks from date after serving copy thereof on the respondent. Notice of appeal is waived by the advocate for the respondent.

( MANJULA CHELLUR, C. J.) ( ARIJIT BANERJEE, J.) Rsg AR(CR)