Leena Power Tech Engineer Pvt Ltd vs Deputy Commissioner of Income TAx Circle 15 (I) (2)

Judgment text excerpt

9-WP(L)-37437-2024 (F).DOCX Darshan IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 37437 OF 2024 Leena Power Tech Engineers Pvt. Ltd. …Petitioner Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income – Tax Circle – 15(I)(2) and Ors. …Respondents ______________________________________________________ Mr Rahul Hakani, a/w Mr Anubhav Singh, Ms Siddhi Sawant, for the Petitioner. Mr Akshileshwar Sharma, for the Respondent-Income Tax. ______________________________________________________ DARSHAN CORAM: M.S. Sonak & PRAKASH PATIL Jitendra Jain, JJ. Digitally signed by DARSHAN DATED: 25 February 2025 PRAKASH PATIL Date: 2025.02.26 11:53:59 +0530 Oral Judgment (Per M S Sonak, J.):- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. The Rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties. 3. The Petitioner challenges the impugned order dated 03 November 2023 made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT”) dismissing the Petitioner’s Miscellaneous Application No.231/MUM/2022 in ITA No.1313/MUM/2020 as being barred by limitation. 1 9-WP(L)-37437-2024 (F).DOCX 4. At the outset, Mr. Rahul Hakani, the learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that there was no delay in instituting the Miscellaneous Application, given the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 10 January 2022 in Sou Motu Writ Petition (C) No.3 of 2020 concerning cognisance for extension of limitation during the COVID period. He submits that assuming a marginal delay of three months, sufficient cause was shown for the condonation of delay. 5. On the above grounds, Mr Hakani submitted that the impugned order may be set aside, delay, if any, condoned and directions be issued to the ITAT to decide Petitioner’s Miscellaneo