Orissa High Court
Principal Commissioner Of vs M/S.Orissa Mining Corporation on 18 April, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ITA No.87 of 2022
Principal Commissioner of ..... Appellant
Income Tax-1, Bhubaneswar Mr.T.K.Satapathy, Advocate
Vs.
M/s.Orissa Mining Corporation ..... Respondent
Ltd. Mr.K.K.Sahoo, Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.TALAPATRA
JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
ORDER
18.04.2023
Order No. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
02.
2. Heard Mr.T.K.Satapathy, learned Senior Standing Counsel,
Income Tax.
3. Mr. Satapathy, learned Senior Standing Counsel, Income Tax
has challenged the stamp report in respect of the limitation. According
to the Stamp Report, there is a delay of 12 days and for computing the
said delay, the calculation has been made in the following manner:
"Date of judgment/Awards 21-06-2022
Date of valid presentation 31-10-2022
_____________________________________
Total period occupied 132 days
Limitation 120 days
Certified copy period ____
_______________________________________
Delay in filing 12 days"
//2//
4. According to Mr. Satapathy, learned Senior Standing Counsel,
Income Tax, Section 268 of the I.T. Act provides for exclusion of time
taken for obtaining copy, has not been properly appreciated by the
Stamp Reporter. It provides that in computing the period of limitation
prescribed for an appeal or an application under the said Act, the day
on which the order complained of was served and, if the assessee was
not furnished with a copy of the order when the notice of the order was
served upon him, the time taken for obtaining a copy of such order,
shall be excluded. Mr.Satapathy having shown the date of receipt of
the impugned order dated 21.06.2022, has contended that the copy was
received by the appellant on 04.07.2023. As such, there is no delay.
The analogy of Mr.Satapathy is well - reasoned and as such, we hold
that there is no delay in preferring this appeal. Hence, the objection to
the limitation is waived by us.
5. Mr. Satapathy, learned Senior Standing Counsel has also filed
Memorandum by recording such contention. The said Memorandum is
taken on record.
(S.Talapatra)
Judge
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
03. I.A. No.115 of 2022
1. This is an application for dispensing with filing of the original
copies of the assessment order dated 25.12.2018, Annexure-2 to the
Memorandum of Appeal and the First Appellate Order dated
16.08.2019, Annexure-3 to the Memorandum of Appeal.
2. Mr.Satapathy, learned Senior Standing Counsel, Income Tax has
//3//
submitted that two authenticated copies of those orders have been
enclosed with the Memorandum of Appeal. There would be no
impediment for dispensing with filing of the certified copies. Hence,
filing of the certified copies, may be dispensed with.
3. In view of the above submission, as aforestated, we are inclined
to dispense with the filing of certified copies at this stage and hence,
the requirement of filing of certified copies is dispensed with for the
time being. But the appellant shall file the certified copies of
Annexures - 2 and 3 during pendency of the appeal without fail.
4. In terms of the above, the Interlocutory Application stands
allowed.
(S.Talapatra)
Judge
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
04. ITA No.87 of 2022
1. Heard Mr. Satapathy, learned Senior Standing Counsel, Income
Tax appearing for the appellant.
2. This is an appeal under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 challenging the order dated 21.06.2022 delivered in the Second
Appeal being ITA No.330/CTK/2019 by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack.
3. According to Mr.Satapathy, the premises on which the said
order has been filed by dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue is
completely erroneous inasmuch as Section 251 of the IT Act which
provides the scope to file an appeal by the Revenue, nowhere
postulates involvement of the substantial question of law, pari materia
Section 260A of the Income Tax for admission of the appeal.
//4//
Substantially, the following substantial question of law has been
framed at the time of hearing the appeal.
"Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack
(in short, ITAT Cuttack Bench) had acted and decided the
second appeal beyond the statutory scope while draw their
inference on the ground that no substantial question of law
was involved in the appeal and hence, the appeal was bound to
be dismissed ?
The appellant will be permitted to raise ancillary questions
related to the above.
4. Admit.
5. Issue notice, returnable on 03.07.2023.
6. Since Mr.K.K.Sahoo, learned counsel has entered in appearance
for the assessee - respondent by filing the deed of power, no formal
notice is called for. But Mr. Satapathy, learned Senior Standing
Counsel, Income Tax shall supply a copy of the Memorandum of
Appeal with all enclosures to Mr. Sahoo, learned counsel, in the course
of the day.
(S.Talapatra)
Judge
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
Bichi
