Supreme CourtDivision Bench(2008) 11 SC CK 0001

Commissioner of Income Tax vs Indian Express (Mumbai) (P) Ltd.

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 17 November 2008

HON’BLE JUDGES
S. B. Sinha, J · Cyriac Joseph, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
CC No. 14829 of 2003

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 347 words
1.

The purported substantial question of law which has arisen for consideration in this SLP is as to whether a payment of water charges would amount to revenue expenditure or not.

2.

The High Court dismissed the appeal summarily. The special leave petition, however, is barred by 481 days. The SLP although contains only six grounds, the application for condonation of delay runs into thirty pages. Large number of decisions have been cited to suggest as to what judiciary is required to do in such matters. In a case of this nature, we wish to observe that it is high time that the petitioner, viz., the Commissioner of income tax should try to set its own house in order. We fail to understand why apart from the fact that the special leave petitions are filed contrary to the circular letters issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes and in respect of assessment years which are more than twenty years old. It is beyond any comprehension as to why actions are not taken against the officers for whose fault the delay has occurred.

3.

We, furthermore, fail to appreciate as to why the procedure of placing the records before so many officers for filing an application for grant of special leave cannot be minimized.

4.

In this application we find that the High Court passed the impugned judgment on 13-2-2007 and an application for grant of certified copy has been filed on 23-11-2007, i.e., after a period of nine months. Similarly, although the certified copy was received on 29-11 -2007, the date of proposal was received in Director of Income Tax (L&R) on 22-2-2008, ie., after a period of three months. Who is responsible for such delay and what action has been taken against the officers concerned has not been disclosed in the application for condonation. No sufficient cause for condonation of delay has been shown.

5.

We, therefore, while dismissing the special leave petition, direct the Commissioner of income tax to consider the desirability of taking appropriate action(s) in the light of the observations made hereinbefore.