Self-operating order was passed by Prothonotary & Senior Master, rejecting revenue’s appeal for non-removal of office objections. Revenue filed instant three Notices of Motion seeking condonation of delay of 286 days in seeking to set aside above self-operating order. However, it was found that affidavits-in-support of Notices of Motion were bereft of any particulars, inasmuch as, basic date of when Assessing Officer came to know of dismissal of Appeals for non-removal of office objections was even not mentioned therein. High Court held that since Affidavits-in-support were most casual and there was no explanation even attempted to be offered for delay, therefore, all Notices of Motion were to be dismissed. SLP filed by revenue is dismissed.
PCIT v. Akruti City Ltd. (2024) 298 Taxman 1 (SC) Editorial : CIT v. Akruti City Ltd (2018) 94 taxmann.com 725 (Bom)(HC)
S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Delay of 286 days-Order was passed by Prothonotary & Senior Master, rejecting revenue’s appeal for non-removal of office objections-All notice of motions were dismissed by High Court-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [Art 136]