Jharkhand High Court Dismisses Dept's Appeals For Not Filing Delay Condonation Application Along With Appeal Memo
The Jharkhand High Court, while dismissing the appeal filed by the department, held that a delayed condonation application not filed with an appeal memo and subsequent filing cannot cure defects.The bench of Chief Justice B.R. Sarangi and Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad has observed that time and again if the appeal memo does not contain an application of delay condonation and was not filed at...
The Jharkhand High Court, while dismissing the appeal filed by the department, held that a delayed condonation application not filed with an appeal memo and subsequent filing cannot cure defects.
The bench of Chief Justice B.R. Sarangi and Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad has observed that time and again if the appeal memo does not contain an application of delay condonation and was not filed at the time of filing of the same, then even subsequent filing of the application for condonation of delay cannot cure the defect. As such, the delay condonation application having not been filed till date in spite of the opportunity given, the delay cannot be condoned as the appeals are grossly barred by limitation.
The department has filed the appeals to quash the order passed by the Judicial Member and Accountant Member of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Ranchi Bench, Ranchi in the appeal for different assessment years.
The department contended that even though the appeals have been filed but at a belated stage, therefore, he wants to take necessary steps for condonation of delay and file applications.
The appeals were filed in 2020, but no steps have been taken till date to condone the delay; therefore, the department has sought time to file applications for condonation of delay.
The respondent assessee contended that the appeal needs to be filed along with a condonation of delay application, and by the time the appeal was preferred, it was known to the appellant that the appeal is barred by delay. Even though the Court has granted time, the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter have not been removed, nor have any prudent steps been taken by the department to take steps for condonation of delay. The appeal should be rejected.
The court noted that even if it is filed during the time of COVID, in the meantime, four years have passed, but the Department has not taken steps for filing a condonation of delay application.
The court, while dismissing the appeal, stated that if the department is so conscious about the fact that the issue of tax is involved, in that case, filing a defective appeal and not taking steps for filing a condonation of delay application shifts the responsibility upon the department also.
Counsel For Appellant: Anurag Vijay
Counsel For Respondent: Mahendra Choudhary
Case Title: PCIT Versus Tripta Sharma
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 124
Case No.: Tax Appeal No. 14 of 2020 With I.A. No.698 of 2021