9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 568X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 17 to 21st June 2018, still the rectification application had been filed beyond the six months period stipulated in Section 245D(6B) and was thus barred by limitation. We find no error in finding of the Commission. Thus whether the grievance raised by petitioner before the Commission and in the said Writ Petition that the consent as recorded was not given would qualify to be a mistake apparent from the record which is the only thing the Commission may rectify. Petition dismissed. - WRIT PETITION NO. 569 OF 2020 - - - Dated:- 10-7-2023 - K.R. SHRIRAM FIRDOSH. P. POONIWALLA, JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Suresh Kumar. For the Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Jas Sanghavi a/w Mr. Ansh Agal i/b PDS Legal. P.C. : 1. Petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he 27,10,00,000/- out SOF) of aggregating which income to of Rs. 25,69,781/- has already been offered in the return of income for AY 2014-15 filed before the AO. Hence, the aggregate income is computed at Rs. 26,84,30,219/- (27,10,00,000/- - 25,69,781/-). There was no objection from the Department as well as the applicant on this estimation. This suo motu offer in no way detracts from the character of full and true disclosure. Both the sides have agreed to this addition, and the applicant, vide its letter dated 07.09.2016 filed on 08.09.2016 has accepted the same and have provided the bifurcation assessment year wise. This settles all the issues in the applicant's case, and the case is settled accordingly. It was petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ragged into the arena. Judgments cannot be treated as mere counters in the game of litigation . [(1) Per Lord Atkinson in Somasundaran v. Subramanian, A.I.R 1926 P.C. 136]. We are bound to accept the statement of the Judges recorded in their judgment, as to what transpired in court. We cannot allow the statement of the judges to be contradicted by statements at the Bar or by affidavit and other evidence. If the judges say in their judgment that something was done, said or admitted before them, that has to be the last word on the subject. The principle is well settled that statements of fact as to what transpired at the hearing, recorded in the judgment of the court, are conclusive of the facts so stated and no one can contradict su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on to rectify. By the impugned order dated 15th January 2019, the Commission dismissed the application of petitioner. The Commission came to the conclusion that even if it excluded the time spent pursuing the writ petition from 10th February 2017 to 21st June 2018, still the rectification application had been filed beyond the six months period stipulated in Section 245D(6B) and was thus barred by limitation. We find no error in finding of the Commission. 4. Paragraph 6 of the impugned order reads as under: 6. We have heard both the sides and have perused the material on record. We would deal first with the maintainability of the rectification application moved by the Pr CIT. We find that the Order u/s 245D(4) in the instant case was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
