9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Rectification of order based on miscellaneous application containing various grounds not considered by the Tribunal. Analysis: The judgment involves a miscellaneous application seeking rectification of an order by the ITAT Delhi. The application, supported by an affidavit and case laws, was moved by the assessee's counsel. The counsel argued that all grounds in the appeal were not decided by the Tribunal, which goes against the provisions of law. The Tribunal's failure to provide reasons for rejecting prayers and not considering all evidence was highlighted. Reference to various case laws, including Supreme Court judgments, emphasized the importance of thorough consideration and proper reasoning in decisions. The counsel also pointed out inconsistencies in following precedents and ignoring crucial affidavits and judgments. The Tribunal's failure to provide specific findings on submissions and legal points raised was criticized. The counsel sought rectification, citing glaring mistakes apparent on record. The Tribunal considered the submissions and material presented by both parties. It acknowledged the counsel's argument regarding the non-discussion of certain affidavits and judgments, admitting the apparent mistake on record. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to recall the order and restore the appeal for a fresh disposal on merit. The decision to recall the order was based on the need to address all aspects raised during the hearing of the miscellaneous application. Therefore, the miscellaneous application was allowed, and the original order was recalled, directing the registry to re-fix the appeal for a fresh disposal on merit. This judgment highlights the importance of thorough consideration of all grounds, evidence, and legal precedents in appellate proceedings. It underscores the need for proper reasoning and specific findings in decisions, as well as the obligation to address all arguments raised by the parties. The Tribunal's decision to recall the order demonstrates a commitment to ensuring that justice is served by allowing for a comprehensive review of the case before reaching a final decision.
|
