{"id":219942,"date":"2019-09-24T17:00:39","date_gmt":"2019-09-24T11:30:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=219942"},"modified":"2019-09-26T13:11:07","modified_gmt":"2019-09-26T07:41:07","slug":"chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/","title":{"rendered":"Chh HC | Information supplied after statutory period of delay caused penalty, to be imposed under sub-section (1) S. 20 of RTI Act"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Chhattisgarh High Court: <\/strong>Goutam Bhaduri, J. imposed a penalty under Section 20 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 due to delay in the information sought by the seeker.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In the present case, Counsel for the petitioner Shalvik Tiwari submitted that the petitioner sought information in respect to the following:<\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li><em>In the primary health centre Banji, Khogapani, Behrasi, Banjaridad, Bhaiswar and other primary health centers different amounts were received by the Chief Medical &amp; Health Officer, particulars of the amount so received and the date thereof was sought for.<\/em><\/li>\n<li><em>Primary health center as to what equipments were purchased for how much amount?<\/em><\/li>\n<li><em>Copy of the cash-book from November, 2008 till 28-03-2009 i.e. the date of application.<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Counsel submits that, no information was provided to the petitioner within a period of 30 days from such request; therefore petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 19(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The above-stated appeal remained unanswered for a period of 45 days and lastly, the second appeal was filed before the Commission under Section 19(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Further, it was contended that Commission directed respondent 3 to provide a certified copy of the required documents. From the date of initial application, until the final documents\/information was supplied, approximately 23 months of delay was caused. Therefore, penalty as required under sub-section (1) of Section 20 of the Act, 2005 should be imposed on the respondents.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Counsel, Shyam Sundar Lal Tekchandani, represented respondent 1 and Sudeep Verma, Dy. GA for the State represented respondents 2 and 3.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">On perusal of the record, it is evident that the initial application seeking information was made under Section 6 of the Act, 2005. No information was supplied within 30 days as contemplated under sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Act, 2005.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">It is also observed with the entire facts with order-sheets of the second appeal shows that the information as sought for were supplied to the petitioner quite late. The entire course would reveal that there has been almost a delay of 23 months with respect to the information sought for and eventually satisfaction arrived by the seeker.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The <strong>statutory requirement under sub-section (1) of Section 20, the legislation has used the word \u2018shall\u2019 for imposing the penalty. <\/strong>However, the outer limit has been fixed of Rs 25,000.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In the present case, since the delay has been caused of about 23 months, as a result, respondents 2 and 3would be required to pay a penalty of Rs 25,000, which may be imposed under sub-section (1) of Section 20 of the Act, 2005.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Court also added that, since the information was not provided as per the requirement of the statute, the respondent 3 would be required to pay an amount of Rs 25,000 which shall be deposited with the treasury within a period of 3 months. [Rajesh Kumar Patel v. CIC, <a href=\"http:\/\/scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/Q19EiV8l\"><b>2019 SCC OnLine Chh 99<\/b><\/a>, decided on 13-09-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Chhattisgarh High Court: Goutam Bhaduri, J. imposed a penalty under Section 20 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 due to delay <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[37708,37709],"class_list":["post-219942","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-statutory-period-of-delay","tag-sub-section-1-of-section-20-of-rti-act-2005"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Chh HC | Information supplied after statutory period of delay caused penalty, to be imposed under sub-section (1) S. 20 of RTI Act | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chh HC | Information supplied after statutory period of delay caused penalty, to be imposed under sub-section (1) S. 20 of RTI Act\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Chhattisgarh High Court: Goutam Bhaduri, J. imposed a penalty under Section 20 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 due to delay\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-09-24T11:30:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-09-26T07:41:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/chattisgarh_high_court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/\",\"name\":\"Chh HC | Information supplied after statutory period of delay caused penalty, to be imposed under sub-section (1) S. 20 of RTI Act | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2019-09-24T11:30:39+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-09-26T07:41:07+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chh HC | Information supplied after statutory period of delay caused penalty, to be imposed under sub-section (1) S. 20 of RTI Act\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Chh HC | Information supplied after statutory period of delay caused penalty, to be imposed under sub-section (1) S. 20 of RTI Act | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chh HC | Information supplied after statutory period of delay caused penalty, to be imposed under sub-section (1) S. 20 of RTI Act","og_description":"Chhattisgarh High Court: Goutam Bhaduri, J. imposed a penalty under Section 20 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 due to delay","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-09-24T11:30:39+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-09-26T07:41:07+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/chattisgarh_high_court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/","name":"Chh HC | Information supplied after statutory period of delay caused penalty, to be imposed under sub-section (1) S. 20 of RTI Act | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2019-09-24T11:30:39+00:00","dateModified":"2019-09-26T07:41:07+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/24\/chh-hc-information-supplied-after-statutory-period-of-delay-caused-penalty-to-be-imposed-under-sub-section-1-s-20-of-rti-act\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chh HC | Information supplied after statutory period of delay caused penalty, to be imposed under sub-section (1) S. 20 of RTI Act"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":245659,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/rti-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":219942,"position":0},"title":"Utt HC | Delay in providing information under RTI Act does not amount to penalty, if valid reasons for the delay are proved; Court sets aside the penalty","author":"Editor","date":"March 16, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Uttaranchal High Court: Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J., partly allowed an appeal which was filed challenging an order passed by the State Information Commissioner by which a penalty of 25,000 had been imposed upon the petitioner for not providing timely information to respondent 2. The application, under Section 6 (1) of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":214773,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/05\/17\/utt-hc-furnishing-information-beyond-the-mandate-amounts-to-denial-of-information-by-officer-under-rti-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":219942,"position":1},"title":"Utt HC | Furnishing information beyond the mandate amounts to denial of information by officer under RTI Act","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 17, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Uttaranchal High Court: Alok Singh, J. dismissed a writ petition filed by Sahak Nagar Adhikari, who was Public Information Officer under Right to Information Act, 2005. The petitioner contended that, a show cause notice was issued upon him which sought an explanation as to why a penalty should not be\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":220655,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/10\/cic-enforcement-directorate-exempted-under-s-24-of-rti-act-from-disclosing-information-regarding-panama-paper-leak-case\/","url_meta":{"origin":219942,"position":2},"title":"CIC | Enforcement Directorate exempted under S. 24 of RTI Act from disclosing information regarding &#8220;Panama Paper Leak Case&#8221;","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 10, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Central Information Commission (CIC): Bimal Jhulka, Information Commissioner, disposed of an appeal with respect to the information being sought from Directorate of Enforcement in the very famous Panama Paper Leak Case. The facts of the present case are that, the appellant had filed an RTI application seeking information regarding the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":327379,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/25\/does-information-seeker-have-locus-standi-in-penalty-proceedings-u-s-20-of-rti-act-delhi-hc-answers\/","url_meta":{"origin":219942,"position":3},"title":"Does information seeker have locus standi in penalty proceedings under Section 20 of RTI Act? Delhi HC answers","author":"Editor","date":"July 25, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The formation of opinion under Section 20(2) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 is in the exercise of supervisory powers of Central Information Commission and not in the exercise of the adjudicatory powers.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":31751,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/01\/05\/rbi-cannot-deny-giving-information-under-rti-act-by-taking-plea-of-fiduciary-relationship-with-other-banks\/","url_meta":{"origin":219942,"position":4},"title":"RBI cannot deny giving information under RTI Act by taking plea of fiduciary relationship with other banks","author":"Sucheta","date":"January 5, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In the present matter the question arose that whether Reserve Bank of India can deny giving information to the respondent under RTI Act, 2005 on the ground of economic interest, commercial confidence, and fiduciary relationship with other banks, the Division Bench of \u00a0M.Y. Eqbal and C. Nagappan,JJ., held\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Banking and Negotiable Instruments&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Banking and Negotiable Instruments","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/banking-and-negotiable-instruments\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":288042,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/28\/delhi-high-court-emphasizes-on-the-importance-of-timely-show-cause-notice-under-the-income-tax-act-1961-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":219942,"position":5},"title":"Delhi High Court set aside delayed show cause notice issued by Revenue Department under IT Act","author":"Editor","date":"March 28, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Delhi High Court observed that there was an unexplained substantial delay in issuing the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 09-11-2017 and thus, is inexcusable in the eyes of law","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/219942","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=219942"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/219942\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=219942"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=219942"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=219942"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}