| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2002 SLG 2670 2002 SLD 2670 (2002) 257 ITR 773 |
Punjab and Haryana High Court
SWATANTER KUMAR AND N.K. AGGARWAL, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
SWATANTER KUMAR AND N.K. AGGARWAL, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Commissioner of IncomE tax
v.
Ram Mohan Kabra
Law:
Section:
Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - High Court, reference to - Tribunal held that order of authority below in, declining condonation of delay, was fully justified and rejected reference application of revenue holding that it had given a finding of fact and no question of law arose - Whether discretion to condone or not to condone delay would always be a question of law - Held, no - Whether such question would be a question of fact unless such exercise of discretion is perverse or illogical - Held, yes - Authorities, in instant case, had exercised their discretion and given specific reasons in order which were logical and nothing perverse was found in impugned order - Whether since reasons stated for declining reference were well in consonance with settled cannons of law governing subject, Tribunal was fully justified in declining reference to High Court - Held, yes FACTS The revenue filed an appeal after a delay of five days. According to the revenue, there was sufficient cause and bona fide human error for which an affidavit was filed by the Assessing Officer, covering the version of the receipt clerk for putting up the file late. But the delay was not condoned by the authority below. On appeal by the revenue, the Tribunal held that the orders of the authority below in declining the condonation of delay was fully justified. The Tribunal also rejected the reference application under section 256(1) holding that it had given a finding of fact and no question of law arose out of its finding. The revenue's contention was that discretion to condone or not to condone the delay would always be a question of law. On reference under section 256(2) : HELD It cannot be held that the discretion to condone or not to condone the delay would always be a question of law. The provisions relating to prescription of limitation in every statute must not be construed so liberally that they would have the effect of taking away the benefit accruing to the other party in a mechanical manner. Where the Legislature spells out a period of limitation and provides for power to condone the delay as well, then such delay can be condoned only for sufficient and good reasons supported by…
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