9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 153X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mportant aspect which would have a bearing on the assessment orders. Under such circumstances, the Commission ought to have recalled its order of settlement for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 by granting the application for rectification – Ordered accordingly. - SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 343 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 13-3-2013 - AKIL KURESHI AND SONIA GOKANI , JJ. For the Appellant : S.N. Soparkar and B.S. Soparkar. For the Respondent : Mrs. Mauna M. Bhatt. ORDER:- PER : Akil Kureshi Heard learned counsel for the parties for final disposal of the petition. Petitioner has challenged a common order dated 23.5.12 passed by the Settlement Commission for various assessment years. The challenge, however, is confi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation before the Settlement Commission on 12.7.12. Such application, however, came to be dismissed by the Commission in the following terms: "3. As per section 245D(6B) the Commission can rectify any mistake which is apparent from record. The issue raised by the applicant is a debatable one and would amount to review of the order passed u/s.245D(4) which is not permissible under law. Hence the Misc. Appln. Filed by the applicant is rejected. It is not in dispute that by virtue of newly introduced sub-section (6B) to section 245D of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Settlement Commission has power to rectify its own error which are apparent on the face of the record. In fact, the Commission has also not disputed this aspect of the matt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in our opinion, the Commission was required to bear in mind this important aspect which would have a bearing on the assessment orders. Under such circumstances, the Commission ought to have recalled its order of settlement for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 by granting the application for rectification. We order accordingly. However, thereafter, what fresh order may be passed is entirely in the realm of the Commission's jurisdiction. We do not propose to substitute our judgment or understanding for that of the Commission. For such purpose, we place back the settlement proceedings for those two years for the fresh disposal at the hands of the Commission. Counsel for the petitioner stated that under the order of the Commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
