The Commissioner Of Income Tax Delhi-Ii v. Mansarover Investments Ltd.

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 2.

+ ITA 136/2016 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-II ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Raghvendra Singh and Mr.

Sharad Agarwal, Advocates.

versus MANSROVER INVESTMENTS LTD. ..... Respondent

CORAM:

JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 16.02.2016 CM No. 4778/2016 (for condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal) & ITA No. 136/2016

1. There is an inordinate delay of 1075 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 the change of Standing Counsel for the Department and the failure by the earlier counsel to inform the Department about the appeal lying in defect. This explanation does not impress the Court. It is not possible to accept that no one in the Department followed up on the filing of appeals and allowed a period of almost three years to elapse before the appeal could be re-filed. The Department has a cell in the High Court which is under the supervision ITA No. 136/2016

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.

3. The application CM No. 4778/2016 for condonation of the delay of 1075 days in re-filing the appeal is dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

S. MURALIDHAR, J VIBHU BAKHRU, J FEBRUARY 16, 2016/dn ITA No. 136/2016