Special Civil Application Nos. 5159 and 5160 of 2017. Case: Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vadodara-4 Vs Navjivan Roller Flour & Pulse. Gujarat High Court
|Case Number:||Special Civil Application Nos. 5159 and 5160 of 2017|
|Party Name:||Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vadodara-4 Vs Navjivan Roller Flour & Pulse|
|Counsel:||For Respondents: K.M. Parikh, Advocate|
|Judges:||M.R. Shah and B.N. Karia, JJ.|
|Issue:||Constitution of India - Articles 226, 227|
|Judgement Date:||March 24, 2017|
|Court:||Gujarat High Court|
M.R. Shah, J.
As common question of law and facts arise in both these petitions and as such with respect to the same assessee, arising out of the common order but with respect to different assessment orders, both these writ petitions are head and disposed of together.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common Order dated 23rd July 2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "C" Bench, Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as, "the Tribunal"] in Misc. Application Nos. 12 & 13/AHD/2015 for Assessment Years 2006-2007 & 2007-2008, by which the Tribunal has dismissed the said Applications, the Revenue has preferred the present Special Civil Applications under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India.
Facts leading to filing of Special Civil Applications in nutshell are as under:
3.1 That earlier, against the common order passed by the ITAT in I.T.A Nos. 2698 & 2699/Ahd/2009 for A.Y 2006-2007 & 2007-2008, the Revenue preferred Tax Appeal No. 367 of 2013 before this Court. That, vide Oral Order dated 21st October 2013, Division Bench disposed of the said Appeal by relegating the Revenue to make appropriate application before the learned Tribunal, as it was the contention on behalf of the Revenue that certain points which were raised in the Appeal memo though were raised in appeal before the Tribunal, the same were not decided by the learned Tribunal. Therefore, instead of entertaining the Tax Appeals preferred by the Revenue, the Division Bench thought it fit to relegate the Revenue to prefer R.O.M before the learned Tribunal and consequently disposed of the said Appeals by specifically observing that if such rectification applications are filed within four weeks of the date of the said order, the same shall be decided within a period of four weeks thereafter. It appears that thereafter, the Revenue preferred M.A Nos. 197 & 198/Ahd/2013 in I.T.A Nos. 2698 & 2699/Ahd/2009 [For A.Y 2006-07 & 2007-8].
3.2 By common Order dated 26th September 2014, the learned ITAT dismissed the said Applications by observing that there is no error apparent on the face of it. That thereafter, instead of challenging the said common Order dated 26th September 2014 passed in the aforesaid M.A Nos. 197 & 198/Ahd/2013 before this Court and/or even without preferring any appeals thereafter against the original order passed by the learned ITAT in I.T.A Nos. 2698 & 2699/Ahd/2009, the Revenue again preferred M.A Nos. 12 &...
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL