Please click on the categories to the right to find what you are looking for. Click on this icon to download the file. You will need a PDF reader to view the files. You can download one for free from Foxit 1.8 MB or from Adobe 20MB.

(422.3 KiB, 324 DLs)

Download: mahavir_prasad_260A_condonation_delay.pdf

U/s 260A, High Court has no power to condone delay

 

S. 260A permits the filing of an appeal to the High Court within 120 days. In Hongo India 236 E.L.T. 417 and Chaudharana Steels 238 E.L.T. 705, the Supreme Court held in the context of sections 35H & 35G of the Excise Act, that in the absence of specific powers, the High Court has no power to condone delay. On the question whether the said judgement of the Supreme Court would apply to s. 260A as well, HELD:

 

The Income-tax Act is a special law. The nature of the remedy provided therein are such that the legislature intended it to be a complete code by itself which alone should govern the several matters provided by it. The scheme of the Income-tax Act supports the conclusion that the time limit prescribed u/s 260A to file an appeal before the High Court is absolute and unextendable by court u/s 5 of the Limitation Act and the limitation cannot be extended by invoking the provisions of s. 5 of the Limitation Act. Since the appeals were filed beyond the prescribed period of 120 days they had to be dismissed on the ground of limitation.

 

See Also: CIT vs. Grasim Industries (Bombay High Court). Note: The Finance Bill, 2009 has proposed to amend ss. 35G & 35H of the Excise Act to supersede the said judgements of the Supreme Court. However, no amendment has been proposed to s. 260A so far.


Related Judgements

  1. Prasad Agents vs. ITO (Bombay High Court) 

    Where the question arose whether the Explanation to s. 73 (which deems the loss from trading in shares by a company to be speculation loss) can be confined only to cases where there is manipulation and whether the loss arising on valuation of closing stock of shares is also…

  2. Sahney Kirkwood vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court) 

    Where the question arose whether in respect of an appeal admitted u/s 260A, the High Court has power to grant stay of recovery of outstanding demand, HELD:
     
    (i) S. 260A provides that the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure relating to appeals to the High Court shall apply; 

    (ii)…

Comments are closed.