9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1816X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Hirak Biotech Limited for the AY 2006-07 - HELD THAT:- Having gone through the contents of the application and keeping in view the concept of fair opportunity to the applicant, the Court deems it proper to recall the judgment dated 23.02.2017. To some extent, the applicant is justified in canvassing that inadvertently an assertion is made in the judgment that no substantial business of the company after September, 2005 took place and substantially transaction took place while petitioner was the Director and, therefore, without much entering into reexamination of facts, the Court deems it proper to recall the judgment as sought for so as to enable the applicant to meet with the case in detail. Further qua the decisions which are incorp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the Assessment Year 2006-07. It is the further case of the applicant that the petition was heard by the Bench and vide judgment dated 23.02.2017 the petition came to be dismissed however while going through the judgment, according to the learned advocate for the applicant, some errors have been committed through inadvertence which are apparent on record. As a result of this, the present application is submitted for reviewing / recalling of the said judgment and order dated 23.02.2017. 3. Mr. Soparkar, learned senior advocate appearing with Mr.Jaimin Dave, learned advocate appearing for the original petitioner has contended that some inadvertent errors have been crept in, in the judgment. It was submitted that in paras: 5(7) to 5(10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowing the applicant to meet with the decisions which are mentioned in the order. 4. Mr.M.R.Bhatt, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the authority has opposed the stand taken by learned senior advocate for the applicant and has stated that, entire case has been narrated in detail, which can be seen from the paras:2.2 onwards and, therefore, there is no error apparent on the face of record. Mr.Bhatt, learned senior advocate has further submitted that there was a key role of the applicant and at a relevant time was having a substantial holding to the extent of 98.33% and what has been narrated in the order is not outside the record. On the contrary, the Court has analysed all the documents which are attached to the petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... observations made in para:6 are reproduced herein after, since relied upon. 6. As far as the scope of review is concerned, if a court finds that it has committed an error which is apparent on the face of the record and that error is pointed out to it in a review petition, there is nothing which prevents the court from correcting the order. In the judgment initially passed by the learned Single Judge, the court did not take into consideration the arguments raised that this portion of land was chakout and therefore, was not part of the consolidation scheme. Therefore, the learned Single Judge was justified in reconsidering the matter. 7. Resultantly, the present application is allowed. Main matter to be heard afresh in accorda ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
