Pr. Commissioner Of I. Tax-2 v. M/S. Bharti Airtel Ltd. (Erstwhile Bharti Televentures Ltd

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 19.

+ ITA 226/2016 PR. COMMISSIONER OF I. TAX-2 ..... Appellant Through: Mr P. Roy Chaudhuri, Senior Standing Counsel with Ms Laxmi Gurung, Junior Standing counsel.

versus M/S. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD. (ERSTWHILE BHARTI TELEVENTURES LTD) ..... Respondent Through: Ms Kavita Jha and Ms Mehak Gupta, Advocates.

CORAM:

JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE R. K. GAUBA

O R D E R

% 01.04.2016 CM No.11995/2016 (for condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal) & ITA 226/2016

1. There is an inordinate delay of 904 days in re-filing the appeal.

2. The Court finds that the standard excuse that the department is putting forth in all such applications for condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal is regarding the practice directions issued by the Court pertaining to filing of soft copies of the paperbooks in tax matters.

3. As regards this ground, sufficient advance notice had been given to the litigants and Advocates about the filing of soft copies of the paperbooks. ITA 226/2016 Page 1 of 2

Further, the Registry of the Court had made appropriate arrangements for scanning services at the filing counters to facilitate the making of soft copies so that the inconvenience, if any, caused to the Advocates and the litigants is minimised. In any event the change could not have entailed a delay of about two and a half years.

4. Learned counsel for the Appellant pointed out a second reason. The change of Standing counsel for the Department. This again, does not impress the Court. It is not possible to accept that no one followed up on the filing of appeals and allowed a period of about two and a half years to elapse before the appeal could be re-filed. The Department has a cell in the High Court which is under the supervision of a Deputy CIT. He ought to be keeping track of the filing of appeals and should be able to know if any appeal entrusted to the panel counsel for filing has not been listed even once before the Court for a long time.

5. The application CM No.11995/2016 for condonation of the delay of 904 days in re-filing the appeal is dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

S. MURALIDHAR, J R. K. GAUBA, J APRIL 01, 2016 MK ITA 226/2016 Page 2 of 2