9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (1) TMI 646X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal in WTA No. 124/Del./1996 in the case of Sh. Ajay Paliwal in March 2001 in relation to the assessment year 1991-92. The said order was followed in 14 cases against which the present miscellaneous applications have been moved. The concerned assessee filed miscellaneous application No. 28/Del./2002 against the order passed in WTA No. 124/Del./1996 which was dismissed vide a detailed order passed by this Bench on 16-5-2002. All the present 14 miscellaneous applications taken up for hearing today relate to the same issue for which the earlier miscellaneous application filed by one of the assessees stands dismissed. 3. In the miscellaneous applications under consideration the main griev-ance is that all the appeals of the Departme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined to follow the earlier view the matter should have been referred to the Hon ble President for constituting a Special Bench. Reliance was placed on the case of Union of India v. Paras Laminates (P.) Ltd. [1990] 186 ITR 722 (SC). In the opposition the ld. DR strongly supported the order passed by Tribunal and contended that there was no mistake apparent from the record calling for the rectification of the order. With regard to the applicability of Instructions issued by the Board it was submitted that the same were only internal and administrative aimed at reducing litigation. It was pointed out that such instructions could not curtail the powers of the appellate authorities to decide appeals which have been validly filed by the Depar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Central Board of Direct Taxes to the effect that no appeal should be filed with the tax effect is not more than Rs. 50,000 the Department prefers to file an appeal or tax a reference to the High Court on such administrative instructions, the High Court ought not to dismiss the appeal or reject the reference. There is no infirmity in disposal of the appeal of reference on the merit." The Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Blaze Advertising (Delhi) (P.) Ltd. [2002] 255 ITR 460 has held to the same effect by clarifying "that it did not intend to lay down a law that in no case the Court in a situation of this nature would decline to answer the question referred to it for its opinion and it would depend upon the situation obta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
