Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. H.P. Power Corporation Ltd.

1. Facts of the case

The applicant-appellant sought condonation of delay in filing an appeal. Vinay Kuthiala with Diwan Singh Negi appeared for the applicant-appellant, and Vishal Mohan for the respondent. The caption is supplied by matching captured CNR metadata, not printed on the signed order.

Source: PDF p.1

2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court

For the reasons in the application, which the Court considered to explain the delay sufficiently, 121 days of filing delay were condoned. The application was disposed of and registration of the appeal directed.

Source: PDF p.1

3. Judicial decision

OMP(M)19/2016 was disposed of after condonation. The ITA number remained blank on the sheet, which directed listing on 25 May 2017.

Source: PDF p.1

4. Outcome / in whose favour

The applicant obtains relief on limitation and a direction for registration. No main appeal number, admitted question, tax liability or merits outcome is stated.

Source: PDF p.1

5. Expert Comments

AKHB editorial analysis, distinct from the Court’s findings. Subsequent treatment and current-law applicability have not been verified.

The explanation was accepted, but its content is not reproduced

The order says that the reasons in the application sufficiently explain the 121-day delay. It does not set out those reasons. An account of this decision can report the accepted explanation and the result but cannot invent an administrative, legal or personal cause for the delay.

Source: PDF p.1 · PDF p.1

The blank ITA number is part of the source’s limit

The signed sheet prints an ITA placeholder for 2017 without a number. The operative direction is that the appeal be registered. This note therefore uses OMP(M)19/2016 as the identified docket and does not borrow a main appeal number from another H.P. Power Corporation matter.

Source: PDF p.1 · PDF p.1

Condonation and listing do not decide the tax dispute

The source neither admits a stated substantial question nor discusses the underlying assessment. Its direction to list the matter on 25 May 2017 does not establish what occurred on that date. It supplies no tax section, assessment year or disputed figure, so the company’s name must not be used to infer an exemption or deduction issue.

Source: PDF p.1 · PDF p.1

The caption and bench have traceable, different sources

The captured metadata identifies Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and H.P. Power Corporation Ltd. under the matching CNR, OMP(M)19/2016, date and 121-day description. The signed sheet identifies Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice, and Sandeep Sharma. Later appellate proceedings and present treatment are not established by this short order.

Source: PDF p.1 · Matched court metadata for caption · PDF p.1