Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.23 seconds)Section 158BC in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Ram Mohan Kabra on 12 January, 1999
In the case of CIT
V. Ram Mohan Kabra (2002) 257 ITR 773, the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana
High Court has held and observed that where the Legislature spells out a
period of limitation and provides for power to condone the delay as well,
such delay can only be condoned only for sufficient and good reasons
supported by cogent and proper evidence. It is a settled principle of law
that provisions relating to the specified period of limitation must be
applied with their rigour and effective consequences. In this case delay
for filing the appeal late for only a few days was not condoned.
Asstt. Cit vs Taggas Industries Development Ltd. on 7 September, 2000
In the
case of Asstt. CIT V. Taggas Industries Development Ltd. (2002) 80 ITD
21 (Cal), Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, Calcutta, did not condone the delay
for filing the appeal late by 13 days because the delay was not due to
sufficient cause.
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Hind Development Corporation vs Income-Tax Officer And Ors. on 1 June, 1978
In the case of
Hind Development Corpn., Vs. ITO (1979) 118 ITR 873, the Calcutta
High Court held that a Tribunal can condone the delay if there was
sufficient cause for the delay in the submission of the appeal.
Section 5 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Vedabai @ Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil vs Shantaram Baburao Patil And Ors on 20 July, 2001
In the case
IT(SS)A No. 91 and 231/Ahd/2005 5
Dinesh Chandra Bhailal Gandhi
of Vedabhai alias Vijayanatabai Baburao Patil Vs. Shantaram Baburao
Patil (2002) 253 ITR 798 (SC), where it was held that while exercising
discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, to condone delay
for sufficient cause in not filing the appeal within the period prescribed,
Courts should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made
between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where delay is of
a few days. The Court observed that whereas in the former consideration
of prejudice to the other side will be relevant factor and calls for a more
cautious approach. In the latter case no such consideration may arise
and such a case deserves a liberal approach. Now in the present case
delay is not of a few days but of more than ten months. Besides, there is
absolutely no valid explanation/reason for the delay.
1