INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 254

Appeal (Tribunal) - Period of limitation of 6 months - Order recalled beyond the then prescribed period -

This petition was filed by PCIT assailing the legality and correctness of order passed by Tribunal whereby the earlier order of Tribunal passed was recalled and appeal was directed to be placed for hearing afresh. It might be mentioned that assessee had preferred appeal before Tribunal against the order passed by CIT(A) and by order, Tribunal dismissed the appeal. From a perusal of order, it was seen that there was no representation on behalf of assessee and Tribunal decided appeal on merit in the absence of the assessee after hearing the Departmental Representative. Held: Tribunal is vested with the power to rectify any mistake apparent from the record to amend any order passed by it under sub-section (1) of section 254 at any time within six months from the end of the month in which the order was passed, provided the mistake is brought to its notice by assessee or by AO. By order, Tribunal had recalled the ex-parte order and fixed the appeal for hearing afresh, which was filed by none else than assessee. Ultimately, what Tribunal had done is only to provide an opportunity of hearing to assessee. No prejudice was caused to the revenue by such order of Tribunal. Therefore, challenge made by revenue in this writ petition was misconceived.

REFERRED : Srei Infrastructure Finance Limited v. Tuff Drilling Private Limited (2018)11 SCC 470 Sree Ayyanar Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. v. CIT (2008) 301 ITR 434 SC : 2008 TaxPub(DT) 1981 (SC) Kapra Mazdoor Ekta Union v. Management of M/s. Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Limited (2005) 13 SCC 777 Assam Company Ltd & Another v. State of Assam & Others (2001) 248 ITR 567 (SC) : 2001 TaxPub(DT) 1264 (SC) and Grindlays Bank Ltd. v. Central Government Industrial Tribunal & Ors. 1980 Supp SCC 420

FAVOUR : In assessee's favour

A.Y. :

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT