Satya Narayan Sharma Vs. the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1041794
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided OnMar-13-2013
AppellantSatya Narayan Sharma
RespondentThe Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Excerpt:
r.p.no.159/2013 13.03.2013 shri mukesh agrawal, advocate for the petitioner. shri rajesh pandey, advocate for the respondents. this application is filed for extension of the time for deciding the appeal by the respondent no.3, in compliance of order dated 08.11.2012 in w.p.no.17145/2012. it is submitted that because of the personal reasons of the petitioner, the matter could not be heard by the respondent no.3. it is listed for orders today and it is submitted that for a further period of two months', time period for deciding the appeal by respondent no.3, may be extended. considering the fact that vide order dated 08.11.2012, four months' time was allowed to decide the appeal, which period has already expired and it appears that because of personal reasons of petitioner, the matter could not be heard by respondent no.3. as the matter is listed today itself, we dispose of this review petition with following directions:- 1. petitioner himself or through his counsel shall cooperate with the respondent no.3 for hearing of the appeal, in compliance of our order dated 08.11.2012 in w.p.no.17145/2012.”2. the respondent no.3 shall make an endeavour to decide the appeal expeditiously within a period of four weeks from today. with the aforesaid direction, this petition is disposed of finally. c.c.today. (krishn kumar lahoti) (smt. vimla jain) judge judge psm
Judgment:

R.P.No.159/2013 13.03.2013 Shri Mukesh Agrawal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Rajesh Pandey, Advocate for the respondents.

This application is filed for extension of the time for deciding the appeal by the respondent No.3, in compliance of order dated 08.11.2012 in W.P.No.17145/2012.

It is submitted that because of the personal reasons of the petitioner, the matter could not be heard by the respondent No.3.

It is listed for orders today and it is submitted that for a further period of two months', time period for deciding the appeal by respondent No.3, may be extended.

Considering the fact that vide order dated 08.11.2012, four months' time was allowed to decide the appeal, which period has already expired and it appears that because of personal reasons of petitioner, the matter could not be heard by respondent No.3.

As the matter is listed today itself, we dispose of this review petition with following directions:- 1.

Petitioner himself or through his counsel shall cooperate with the respondent No.3 for hearing of the appeal, in compliance of our order dated 08.11.2012 in W.P.No.17145/2012.”

2. The respondent No.3 shall make an endeavour to decide the appeal expeditiously within a period of four weeks from today.

With the aforesaid direction, this petition is disposed of finally.

C.C.today.

(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.

Vimla Jain) Judge Judge psm