Ker HC to Municipal Corp.: Provide Complaint No. to Citizens to Report Unauthorized Waste Dumping  ||  JKL HC: Can’t Fastened Liability Based on Chief Exam. Without Affording Opportunity to Cross Examine  ||  Ker HC to State: Consider Representation by CBSE Schools Assoc. Against Proposed Fee Regulatory Comm.  ||  Ker. HC: Printing Agencies Required to Remove Illegal Hoardings Within 7 Days of Notice  ||  Cal. HC: Police Can’t Use Power U/S 160 CrPC to Call/Arrest Someone Unconnected With Alleged Offence  ||  Cal. HC: Acquiring Property in Name of Wife is Not Benami Transaction  ||  Bombay HC Upholds Validity of Section 13(8)(b) and Section 8(2) of IGST Act  ||  Del. HC: Haj Pilgrimage is a Religious Practice  ||  SC: If Sufficient Evidence of Involvement Exists, Person Not Named in FIR can be Added as Accused  ||  SC: Possessory Right of Prospective Purchaser Protected U/S 53A of TP Act    

Ramesh Kumar Tagrajji Jain vs. ITO - (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) (14 Dec 2022)

Non-consideration of the decision of High Court or of Supreme Court is a 'mistake apparent from record', which could be rectified under Section 254(2) of the IT Act

MANU/IU/1696/2022

Direct Taxation

By way of present Miscellaneous Applications under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( IT Act), the assessee seeks recall of the common order passed under Section 254(1) of the IT Act by the coordinate bench of Tribunal in assessee's appeals.

Learned Authorised Representative ('learned AR') submitted that ground raised by the assessee challenging the non-issuance of notice under 143(2) of the IT Act was not adjudicated by the coordinate bench of the Tribunal.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in NTPC vs. CIT held that, legal issue can be raised for the first time before the Tribunal, so long as the relevant facts are on record in the assessment proceedings for that issue. It is evident that the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was not taken into consideration by the coordinate bench while rendering decision in respect of ground raised by the assessee.

In ACIT vs Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd., the Supreme Court held that, non-consideration of the decision of jurisdictional High Court or of Supreme Court can be said to be a 'mistake apparent from record', which could be rectified under Section 254(2) of the IT Act. Therefore, in view of decision in Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd., present Tribunal deem it appropriate to recall the findings rendered by the coordinate bench of the Tribunal, in respect of ground No. 1, in the exercise of the power conferred under section 254(2) of the IT Act. Miscellaneous Applications by the assessee are allowed.

Tags : ASSESSMENT   COMMON ORDER   RECALL  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2023 - All Rights Reserved