9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1973 (2) TMI 17 - HC - Income TaxTrust - A trust filed an appeal before the Tribunal. For the subsequent years it filed revision petition before the commissioner after the Tribunal s decision - Whether the trust can file an application for amending the revision petition - It cannot hence be said that the assessee was guilty of raising a fresh point for the first time in the revision petitions without raising them at the appellate stage when the matter was decided by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Similar was the situation when the revision applications were filed. In our opinion in the context of the facts and the circumstances of the case the amendment application ought to have been allowed and the point raised therein ought to have been considered on merits - writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned orders of the Commissioner disposing of the revision petitions are quashed. The matter is sent back to the Commissioner for the disposal of the revision petitions in accordance with law
Issues: Amendment of revision petitions, grounds for rejection by Commissioner, validity of amendment application, jurisdiction of the court under article 226 of the Constitution.
Analysis: The judgment delivered by SATISH CHANDRA J. of the High Court of ALLAHABAD pertains to a case involving the petitioner, Messrs. Ram Laxman Janki Trust, challenging the orders of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner for various assessment years. The trust had filed revision petitions before the Commissioner of Income-tax under section 33A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, for the assessment years subsequent to 1952-53. The Commissioner did not dispose of the revision petitions until November 1971, following an appeal decision by the Tribunal in 1967, which held the income assessed in the trust's hands was to be assessed in the hands of a joint Hindu family due to the trust being invalid. The trust subsequently filed an application for amending the revision petitions in light of the Tribunal's decision. However, the Commissioner rejected the amendment application without providing detailed reasons for the rejection. The trust then approached the High Court under article 226 of the Constitution, seeking to quash the Commissioner's order. The High Court, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, held that the amendment application by the trust was justified as it was based on the Tribunal's decision and did not introduce fresh points. The Court found that the trust had a valid cause of action for amending the revision petitions post the Tribunal's decision. Consequently, the High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the Commissioner's orders of March 30, 1972, disposing of the revision petitions, and remanded the matter back to the Commissioner for disposal in accordance with the law and the Court's observations. The petitioner was also granted costs. In conclusion, the High Court's judgment emphasized the importance of allowing the amendment application in this case, considering the factual and legal consistency with the prior Tribunal decision. The Court's decision highlights the need for due consideration of relevant factors and grounds before rejecting such applications, ensuring fair and just proceedings in tax matters.
|
