9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 56X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date, time and venue and dispose of the matter afresh. Before that, it is to be noticed that even if there was a delay condonation petition, on condonation of delay, it would have been appropriate to communicate a date of personal hearing for main matter in cases where Revisional authority at his discretion chooses to give a personal hearing. At the risk of repetition, it is reiterated that this is a case, where 1st respondent has chosen to give an opportunity of personal hearing at his discretion though it is not statutorily imperative. Impugned order bearing reference C.No.217/264/Pr.CIT-1/2017-18 dated 04.03.2019 made by the 1st respondent is set aside. It is made clear that impugned order is set aside on the ground that it has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... came to be passed in this revision application. 5. There is no disputation or disagreement before this Court that the power of revision vested in the 1st respondent shall be exercised either on his own motion or on an application by the assessee. To be noted, in the instant case, it is the latter. Vide Sub Section 3 of Section 264 of IT Act, revision application should have been made by the assessee within one year from the date on which the assessment order sought to be revised was communicated to the writ petitioner. In the instant case, the exact date on which the aforesaid assessment order dated 29.12.2017 was served on the writ petitioner is not readily available. However, even if it is construed from the date of orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be noted, this condition of the assessee, not filing an appeal against the order that is sought to be revised is a condition precedent for entertaining a revision. 7. To this communication dated 03.12.2018, writ petitioner has sent a reply letter dated 11.02.2019 and in this letter, writ petitioner has highlighted two aspects of the matter. One is that the writ petitioner was indisposed and was in bed rest. The other aspect is that the writ petitioner has sought condonation of delay in filing a revision petition, which was filed on 25.06.2018, which as mentioned supra, is well within the stipulated one year. 8. As already alluded to supra, there is no delay in the revision application filed by the writ pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... writ petitioner counsel's say. 10. Learned Revenue counsel, pointed out that the 03.12.2018 communication referred to supra is a second reminder and the writ petitioner has not been diligent in pursuing his revision application. 11. In such a backdrop / trajectory of the revision application, learned counsel for writ petitioner submitted that if a personal hearing is now fixed, writ petitioner would go before the 1st respondent with the required affidavit i.e., affidavit saying that writ petitioner is not filing an appeal against the assessment order 29.12.2017, submit his written submissions, participate in the personal hearing and invite an order afresh from the 1st respondent. 12. Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rsonal hearing is now fixed on 04.09.2019 (Wednesday) at 4.00 p.m in the office of the 1st respondent. Writ petitioner undertakes to attend the personal hearing without fail. In the personal hearing, on 04.09.2019, writ petitioner also undertakes to file an affidavit regarding not filing an appeal, file written submissions / supporting material and prescribed fee before the 1st respondent. (c) After personal hearing, the 1st respondent shall dispose of the revision application filed on 25.06.2018 as expeditiously as possible and in any event within four(4) weeks from the date of the personal hearing. (d) If the writ petitioner does not avail of the personal hearing on 04.09.2019, it is open to the 1st respo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
