ASHWINBHAI B. POKIYA V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CA/1647/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Ashwinbhai B. Pokiya, the applicant, who sought to condone a significant delay in filing a Tax Appeal against an ITAT order concerning the Assessment Year 2004-2005. The delay was attributed to the applicant's belief that the ITAT would correct apparent mistakes in its earlier order, which led to the postponement of the appeal. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic affected the timely gathering of required documents. The court considered these factors and the Supreme Court's directive on extending limitation periods due to the pandemic, ultimately deciding in favor of the applicant.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 746692 (HC-GUJARAT)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 18-10-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: In Re Cognizance For Extension Of Limitation in Miscellaneous Application No.665/2021 in SMW(C) No. 3/2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RULE SERVED
• Assessee Lawyers: VAIBHAVI PARIKH
• Keywords: Condone delay; ITAT; Limitation Period; Miscellaneous Application; Tax appeal
• Section: ITA No. 1011/Ahd/2014

Judgement Text

"C/CA/1647/2022 ORDER DATED: 18/10/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1647 of 2022 In F/TAX APPEAL NO. 9740 of 2021 ========================================================== ASHWINBHAI B. POKIYA Versus THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ========================================================== Appearance: MS VAIBHAVI K PARIKH(3238) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA Date : 18/10/2022 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA) Heard learned advocate Ms. Vaibhavi Parikh for for the applicant. 1.1 Though served with the Rule, nobody appears on behalf of the respondent. 2. This application is filed by the applicant-the original appellant praying to condone the delay of 461 days which has occasioned in preferring the Tax Appeal against judgment and order dated 31.7.2018 passed in ITA No. 1011/Ahd/2014 for Assessment Year 2004-2005. 3. The delay is explained by the following averments, “The applicant had filed a Miscellaneous Application being MA No. 38/SRT/2018 against the impugned order passed by the ITAT as there were certain mistakes apparent from the record in the said Page 1 of 3 C/CA/1647/2022 ORDER DATED: 18/10/2022 order of the ITAT. These mistakes changed the very outcome of the order. The applicant bonafide believed that the ITAT would rectify the said mistakes and recall its order, and therefore, no appeal was preferred before this Hon’ble Court. The said Miscellaneous Application was filed before the ITAT on 03.12.2018 and was taken up for hearing on 06.11.2020 and the same was, however, rejected by the ITAT vide order dated 18.12.2020. The said order passed in the Miscellaneous Application was received by the applicant on 11.01.2021. The applicant then immediately forwarded the said order to its Chartered Accountant for seeking advice for further action who in turn forwarded it to the advocate alongwith the order in the main appeal for preferring tax appeal before this Hon’ble Court. The advocate called for further relevant papers and details. The relevant papers for filing the tax appeal were dispatched to the office of the Chartered Accountant by the Applicant, which were then sent to the office of the advocate. The said papers were received at the office of the advocate in the end of March. There was a delay in obtaining the required documents due to the ongoing covid pandemic. The tax appeal therefore has been filed on 09.04.2021. In any case, the period between 11.01.2021, when the order passed in the Miscellaneous Application was received and 09.04.2021 when the Tax Appeal was filed is to be excluded from computing the delay as per the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case In Re Cognizance For Extension Of Limitation in Miscellaneous Application No.665/2021 in SMW(C) No. 3/2020. The limitation period for filing the tax appeal was over as Miscellaneous Application was preferred by the Applicant, and therefore, the said tax appeal came to be filed on 09.04.2021” Page 2 of 3 C/CA/1647/2022 ORDER DATED: 18/10/2022 4. In the totality of facts and circumstances, sufficient cause is made out. Delay deserves to be granted. Accordingly, delay of 461 days is condoned. 5. This application is allowed. Civil Application stands disposed of Rule is made absolute. (N.V.ANJARIA, J) (BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) C.M. JOSHI Page 3 of 3 "