The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a Tribunal order dismissing a taxpayer's appeal and a late rectification application. The Court held that the late filing was unconscionable and lacked merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
wp1535.14
rng
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.1535 OF 2014
1. M/s Trimurthy Enterprises & anr .. Petitioners
vs.
Mr.Parag A.Vyas for Petitioners None for Respondents
CORAM : M.S.SANKLECHA & G.S.KULKARNI, J
DATED : 16 JULY, 2014 P. C.
the petitioner's appeal for A.Y.1995-1996 for non-prosecution while the
impugned order dated 11.10.2013 dismissed the petitioner's Misc.Application for rectification of the order dated 25.10.2004 passed by
2
wp1535.14
rng
the Tribunal.
rng 3 wp1535.14
by the decision of this Court in Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (supra). However, he submits that the partner of the petitioner no.1 firm looking after the affairs of the firm was not keeping well in as much as he forgets and therefore the delay. Moreover, Mr.Vyas invites our attention to the decision of the Supreme Court in Mafatlal Industries Ltd vs Union of India 1997 (5) SCC 536 to contend that where the rules of natural justice had not been followed such as not giving a personal hearing, the order so passed would be void. It is not disputed that in this case notice of hearing was given to the petitioners but the petitioners chose not to avail of the same. This is not a case of not giving any opportunity of personal hearing. In any case, filing of the Misc.Application after a period 9 years for rectification of the order of the Tribunal is unconscionable.
with no order as to costs.
(G.S.KULKARNI, J) (M.S.SANKLECHA, J)
rng 4 wp1535.14
rng 5 wp1535.14
rng 6 wp1535.14
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the period of limitation for filing an application for rectification under Section 254(2) of the Act is extendable on grounds of natural justice.
Whether delay of nine years in filing a miscellaneou application for rectification of the Tribunal order can be condoned.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd vs Income Tax Appellate Tribunal & ors (Writ Petition No.1740 of 2013)Distinguished¶2
M/s Trimurthy Enterprises & anr
Union of India & ors
M.S.Sanklecha
G.S.Kulkarni
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
