Commissioner Of Income Tax/Weaith Tax, Companieszone, Islamabad vs
This matter arises from a petition before the Supreme Court of Pakistan challenging the impugned judgment of the High Court, which declined to entertain an appeal on the ground that it was barred by time. The core legal question concerned whether the reasons provided in the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1908 were sufficient for the condonation of delay. The Supreme Court held that the High Court had duly considered the grounds for extending the limitation period and rightly found them insufficient, thereby declining to interfere with the decision. The key principle laid down is that appellate interference with the discretionary refusal to condone delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is unwarranted where the lower court has properly considered the grounds and found them lacking.
- Whether the High Court was justified in refusing to condone the delay in filing the appeal under Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1908?
- Will the Supreme Court interfere with the discretionary refusal of a High Court to condone delay when the grounds were duly considered?
- Section 5, Limitation Act 1908
ORDER
Learned High Court vide impugned judgment declined to entertain appeal as the same was barred by time. Reasons given for condonation of delay in application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act were not considered sufficient for condonation of delay. The High Court after having taken into consideration such grounds, declined to agree with the contention of the appellant on the question of extending the period of limitation, therefore, in our considered opinion, no points made out for interference.
2. Petition dismissed, leave declined.
Petition Dismissed.