Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
CGST - Acts + GST Rates GST Ntf. GST Forms GST - Manual GST - FAQ State GST Acts SGST Ntf. I. Tax Manual
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Versus Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation

Notice of Motion for recalling the order - condonation of delay of 110 days in taking out the application and for setting aside the order dated 19th November, 2015 passed by the Prothonotary and Senior Master under Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules rejecting the Revenue's appeal - Held that:- The present Notice of Motion seeks a recall of the order dated 19th August, 2016 and does not make any prayer for recall of an earlier order dated 22nd April, 2016 of this Court or for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rders earlier, the present application would still be liable to be dismissed. This is for the reason that the genesis of the present Notice of Motion is the order dated 19th November, 2015 passed by the Prothonotary and Senior Master which has granted time to remove office objections on or before 17th December, 2015 failing which the petitioner appeal was to stand rejected for non removal of office objections. The applicant Revenue failed to remove office objection resulting in the appeal itself .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ande i/b. Mr.Mihir Naniwadekar for Respondent ORDER P. C. 1. This Notice of Motion has been taken out by the applicant to recall the order dated 19th August, 2016 passed by this Court. By the Order dated 19th August, 2016 passed in the Notice of Motion No. 1978/2016 taken out by the Revenue seeking a recall of the order dated 22nd April, 2016 by which Notice of Motion (L) No.807/2016 was dismissed. The Notice of Motion (L) No. 807 of 2016 was taken out by the Revenue was for condonation of delay .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by the Prothonotary and Senior Master rejecting the applicant's appeal for non removal of office objection. Thus considering this application would be an academic exercise as even if the prayer of recall of the order dated 19th August, 2016 is granted, yet the earlier orders of dismissal of the appeal would stand unaffected. 3. The applicant's appeal to this Court from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was rejected on 19th November, 2015 by the Prothonotary & Senior Master, under Rul .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

19th August, 2016 and after hearing the parties this application was also rejected by a speaking order. 4. As the orders passed on 22nd April, 2016 and 19th August, 2016 were speaking orders after hearing parties dismissing the Notice of Motion, we asked Mr. Mohanty as to how this application was maintainable. Mr. Mohanty states because the Court entertained the second Notice of Motion being Notice of Motion No.1978/2016 seeking to recall the order dated 22nd April, 2016 leading to the order da .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion as a Review Application, we find that the parameters to satisfy a Review of order dated 19th August, 2016 is not satisfied i.e. it is not the case of the applicant Revenue that any new evidence was discovered after the passing of the order or that there is any mistake apparent on record which would justify review of the order dated 19th August, 2016. The application is only seeking an opportunity to argue on facts which would have been urged earlier but not urged when order dated 19th August .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2015 failing which the petitioner appeal was to stand rejected for non removal of office objections. The applicant Revenue failed to remove office objection resulting in the appeal itself being rejected by the Prothonotary and Senior Master.The present affidavit like the earlier affidavits in support of the earlier Notices of Motion offers the same reasons i.e. administrative difficulties namely shortage of staff which has resulted in non removal of office objections. This can hardly be a reason .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

taking up the matter by way of filing a special leave petition in this Court. They cannot claim that they have a separate period of limitation when the Department was possessed with competent persons familiar with court proceedings. In the absence of plausible and acceptable explanation, we are posing a question why the delay is to be condoned mechanically merely because the Government or a wing of the Government is a party before us. 28. Though we are conscious of the fact that in a matter of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version