9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (9) TMI 802 - HC - Income TaxReview petition - Held that - A complete reading of the order under review reveals that the Assessing Officer can proceed in terms of our judgments setting out the legal principles and delivered in the main Appeal. The matter has been sent back to the Assessing Officer and he has to verify the ratable value. If that is to be verified by him, it will be open for the Assessing Officer to consider all the materials including applying the legal principles set out in the main judgment. Therefore, our order should not be taken as in any way adverse to the interests of the Revenue. The Revenue can proceed in accordance with law. We do not find any reason to entertain the Review Petition particularly with the above clarifications.
Issues: Review Petition seeking review of an order passed in Income Tax Appeal, Dismissal of Revenue's Appeal causing prejudice, Clarification on sending the matter back to the Assessing Officer, Exercise of review jurisdiction in such cases.
Issue 1: Review Petition seeking review of an order passed in Income Tax Appeal The judgment pertains to a Review Petition filed to seek a review of an order passed on 14th August, 2014 in Income Tax Appeal No.1213 of 2011. The counsel for the Revenue argued that two orders were passed on 8th August, 2014, and 14th August, 2014, with the latter dealing with the lead case of Commissioner of Income Tax-12 V/s Tip Top Typography. The order passed on 14th August, 2014 was applied in subsequent similar cases. However, the Review Petition was filed as the Court had dismissed the Revenue's Appeal, causing prejudice. Reference was made to an order passed on the same day in another appeal, highlighting the issue at hand. Issue 2: Dismissal of Revenue's Appeal causing prejudice The counsel for the Assessee argued against the Review Petition, stating that the matter had been sent back by the Tribunal to the Assessing Officer with directions regarding the ratable value fixed by the Municipal Authority. The Court clarified that the Assessing Officer should proceed in accordance with the law. It was contended that there was no merit in the Review Petition, and the review jurisdiction could not be exercised in such cases, urging for the dismissal of the petition. Issue 3: Clarification on sending the matter back to the Assessing Officer Upon hearing both sides, the Court found that the Assessing Officer could proceed based on the legal principles outlined in the main Appeal judgment. The matter was directed to be verified by the Assessing Officer in line with the ratable value, allowing consideration of all materials and legal principles from the main judgment. The Court emphasized that its order should not be viewed as adverse to the Revenue's interests, permitting the Revenue to proceed in accordance with the law. Issue 4: Exercise of review jurisdiction in such cases After considering the arguments and the content of the order under review, the Court concluded that the Review Petition lacked merit, especially with the clarifications provided. The Court decided to dispose of the Review Petition, stating that there was no reason to entertain it further. The judgment highlighted the importance of allowing the Assessing Officer to proceed as per the legal principles established in the main judgment, ensuring compliance with the law.
|
