TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 399X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, dismissed. - Delay Condonation Application No.13360 to 13367 of 2014, Review Application No. 866 to 873 of 2014, Income Tax Appeal No.282 to 287 of 2007, Income Tax Appeal No.41 of 2008, Income Tax Appeal No.42 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 28-8-2015 - K M Joseph, CJ And U. C. Dhyani, JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. H. M. Bhatia, Adv For the Respondent : Mr. Mohit Maulekhi, Adv JUDGMENT U C Dhyani, J ( Oral ) 1. Since all the aforesaid Review Applications arise out of the same judgment, therefore, they are being decided by this common judgment for the sake of brevity and convenience. 2. There is delay of 671 days in filing the review applications. The same is vehemently opposed by learned counsel for the assessees. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the tribunal as the judgment of jurisdictional High Court. 7. That the department has preferred the appeal before the Hon ble High Court against the judgment dated 13.05.2014 within time limitation on 12.11. 2014. 8. That thereafter the CCIT, Dehradun given approval to the CIT, Haldwani for filing the review application(MA) before the Hon ble Court and on 14.12.2014 the Income Tax Officer (Hq/Tec) sent the letter to the present counsel for filing the accompanying application before the Hon ble Court. 3. Being satisfied with the sufficiency of foregoing reasons thus furnished in support thereof, delay in filing the review applications is condoned. Delay condonation applications are, therefore, allowed. 4. Learned counse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is, therefore, to be found in sub-Section (1) of s. 11 and not in sub-Section (3) of Section 11. Furthermore, different considerations arise on review. The expression 'review' is used in two distinct senses, namely (1) a procedural review which is either inherent or implied in a court or Tribunal to set aside a palpably erroneous order passed under a misapprehension by it, and (2) a review on merits when the error sought to be corrected is one of law and is apparent on the face of the record. It is in the latter sense that the Court in Patel Narshi Thakershi's case held that no review lies on merits unless a statute specifically provides for it. Obviously when a review is sought due to a procedural defect, the inadvertent error ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the High Court would include the power of review relating to errors apparent on the face of the record. 7. It was, therefore, concluded in D. N. Singh s case (supra) as follows: 12. In view of the aforesaid clear pronouncement of law, we have no scintilla of doubt that the High Court can entertain the application for review arising out of a judgment passed under Section 260A of the Act. 8. Learned counsel for the review applicant also placed a judgment of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in Jolly Polymers vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2015) 1 GLH 343, which concluded that the principles analogous to those flowing from Section 21 of CPC are applied to various situations not only to the proceedings arising out of the Code but also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
