9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (2) TMI 15X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sons is an essential element of administration of justice - Held that impugned order passed on the application under section 18B of the Wealth-tax Act was not sustainable - - - - - Dated:- 8-2-2002 - Judge(s) : V. C. DAGA., J. P. DEVADHAR. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by V.C. DAGA J.-This petition is directed against the order dated September 4, 1986 (exhibit E), passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-II, Mumbai, under section 273A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short), read with section 18B of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ("the W.T. Act" for short) as being arbitrary, perverse and self-contradictory. The facts: The facts necessary to appreciate the rival contentions may be stated briefly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ugh no adverse inference should be drawn while making regular assessments for any of the assessment years and it would be made on its own merits. The petitioner in the said application had also sought waiver of penalty and/or interest leviable in respect of such income. The petitioner, on July 21, 1981, moved another application under section 18B of the Wealth-tax Act for waiver of penalty leviable under the said Act. A similar plea, similar to the plea raised in the application referred to hereinabove, filed under section 273A of the Act, was also made by the petitioner in this application. The petitioner submitted that pursuant to the above two applications extensive discussions had taken place between the petitioner and the first res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of settlement dated July 24, 1981, is placed on record along with the affidavit dated February 8, 2002. In the writ petition filed in the year 1986, specific allegations and positive statement in this behalf were made by the petitioner. No counter-affidavit, to controvert the allegations made in the petition, has been filed, nor is any material placed on record to deny the said settlement dated July 24, 1981. We specifically asked learned counsel for the respondent whether they desire to file any reply to controvert or deny the existence of such settlement. The answer was in the negative. In this view of the matter, the settlement between the parties stands proved. The same can very well be read in support of the contentions raised by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herefore, stating of reasons is one of the essentials of justice. The appellate authority is enjoined and it is incumbent upon it to appreciate the evidence consider the reasoning of the primary authority and assign its own reasons as to why it disagrees with the reasons and findings of the primary authority. Unless adequate reasons are given, merely because it is an appellate authority, it cannot brush aside the reasoning or findings recorded by the primary authority. The order should be self-explanatory and should not keep the higher court guessing for reasons. The reasons provide a live link between the conclusion and the evidence. That vital link is the safeguard against arbitrariness. It gives an opportunity to the higher court to see ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
