Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta,J. - (1.) Mr. Dutt, on the other day, concluded his arguments hoping that the counter argument would be advanced today and to facilitate them this matter was adjourned. This matter was called on today twice and on the second call matter was taken up for hearing when none appears to advance arguments.
(2.) This application is directed against an order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-IV, Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as "the said Commissioner"), whereby and where under the application under Section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act"), has been dismissed on the ground of delay. The learned Commissioner found, while exercising his revisional jurisdiction under the aforesaid section that no sufficient cause having been made out. From the impugned order I find that he was prepared to condone delay for about 15 days only. However, the rest of the time was not excused by him.
(3.) Mr. Dutt, appearing for the petitioner, contends that there are sufficient grounds for which the delay should have been condoned. The order which was sought to be revised Was passed on August 21, 1989, and against that order an appeal was taken out and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal decided the appeal against him on August 29, 1997. On December 26, 1997, the application for revision was filed. It appears from the provisions of Section 264 that this kind of application should be made within one year from the date on which the order in question was communicated to him or the date on which he otherwise came to know of it, whichever is earlier. In either situation time of one year has expired but there is a proviso attached to the section, to enable the Commissioner to condone delay, if he is satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application within that period.;