Law:

Section:

Section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Revision - Of other orders - Assessment years 1971-72 to 1976-77 - Whether question as to whether there is sufficient cause for not filing revision petitions in time, is a pure question of fact - Held, yes - Commissioner in exercise of power under section 264(3) refused to condone delay in filing application by assessee - Whether, since, finding reached by Commissioner that there was no justifiable ground or reason to condone delay was arrived at after adverting to all facts and circumstances of case, there was no legal error or infirmity in such a finding, and consequently, it was to be upheld - Held, yes FACTS The assessee-petitioner feeling aggrieved by the assessment orders, filed revision petitions under section 264. As the revisions were filed beyond one year from the various dates on which the assessments were completed and communicated to the assessee, to the assessee-petitioner also filed applications to condone the delay in filing the revisions. The Commissioner, however, held that there were no good grounds to condone the delay caused in filing the revisions and that it could not at all be stated that the assessee-company was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the revision petitions in time. On writ petition seeking to quash the order passed by the Commissioner: HELD Under proviso to section 264(3), the Commissioner may, if he is satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application within the period of one year from the date on which the order was communicated to him, admit the application made after the expiry of that period. The Commissioner did exercise the jurisdiction vested in him under the proviso to section 264(3). He adverted to the applications filed by the petitioner to condone the delay and had in an elaborate order reached the conclusion that there was no justifiable ground to condone the delay in filing the revisions. The word "sufficient cause" occurring in the proviso to section 264(3) should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice. that the discretion vested in the Commissioner is a judicial one to be exercised in…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492