COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/WEALTH TAX, COMPANIES ZONE, ISLAMABAD
This matter came before the Supreme Court of Pakistan as a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the High Court, which had refused to entertain an appeal on the grounds that it was time-barred. The core legal question addressed was whether the High Court correctly exercised its discretion in declining to condone the delay in filing the appeal under the relevant statutory provisions. The Supreme Court examined the reasons presented by the appellant for the delay and the High Court's subsequent refusal to accept those grounds as sufficient for condonation. Upon review, the Supreme Court held that the High Court had properly considered the arguments and that there was no justification for interfering with the High Court's decision to decline the extension of the limitation period. Consequently, the Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's order, ruling that no valid point was made out for interference, and therefore dismissed the petition for leave to appeal, effectively upholding the dismissal of the appeal by the High Court due to limitation.
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with a High Court's refusal to condone delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1908 when the High Court has duly considered the grounds?
- Is a High Court's discretion to decline condonation of delay subject to interference if the reasons for delay were considered and found insufficient?
- 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 point is made out for interference.
2. Petition dismissed, leave declined.