Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2019 (2) TMI 1681

..... of the order by the parties to the lis, the sections and the sub-sections have been worded in unambiguous manner to convey the intent. No further interpretation of sections or intentions are required. It is a well settled principle of interpretation of status that where the meaning are self explanatory from the provisions and the provisions of section can be interpreted literally no further interpretation is required. We further find that the reliance by the Revenue on the decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of Liladhar T. Khushlani Vs. Commissioner of Custom [2017 (2) TMI 200 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] is misplaced. The said decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court was in context of unamended provisions of section 254(2) i.e. prior to .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... Application u/s. 254(2) has been filed within a period of limitation, if the limitation is counted from the date of receipt of order. If the period of limitation is counted from the end of the month in which the order is passed there is delay of 89 days. The ld. DR submitted that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Liladhar T. Khushlani Vs. Commissioner of Custom in Tax Appeal No. 915 of 2016 decided on 25-01-2017 has held that the period of limitation for filing rectification application starts from the date of dispatch of the order and not from the date of actual passing the order. Similar view has been taken by Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jagmohan Gurbakshish Singh Vs. DCIT in MA No.42/Chd/2018 in ITA No .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... etermining limitation period of six months for filing the Miscellaneous Application under the aforesaid section. The Legislature in its wisdom has purposefully worded sub-section (2) in a particular manner so as to determine the period of limitation for filing Miscellaneous Application for rectification of mistake within a specified time of 6 months from the end of the month in which the order was passed. If the intention of the Legislature was to mark the period of limitation from the date of service of order then the sub-section (2) would have been worded in a manner to express that intent. This fact is explicitly evident from a perusal of sub- section (3) of section 253 wherein the limitation period of appeals to the appellate Tribunal a .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... e sections and the sub-sections have been worded in unambiguous manner to convey the intent. No further interpretation of sections or intentions are required. 7. It is a well settled principle of interpretation of status that where the meaning are self explanatory from the provisions and the provisions of section can be interpreted literally no further interpretation is required. We further find that the reliance by the Revenue on the decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of Liladhar T. Khushlani Vs. Commissioner of Custom (supra) is misplaced. The said decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court was in context of unamended provisions of section 254(2) i.e. prior to the amendment by Finance Act, 2016. Therefore, the said decision does n .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||