Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BHARGAV D.KARIA, PRANAV TRIVEDI
Bhagwanjibhai N.Delwadia – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Rajkot – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenges tribunal's order under article 227. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding the delay and the tribunal's reasoning. (Para 5 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. background facts of the case and procedural issues. (Para 6) |
| 4. court's observations on the tribunal's handling of the case. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. order to quash tribunal's order and direct further proceedings. (Para 20) |
JUDGMENT :
BHARGAV D. KARIA, J.
ORDER IN SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7988 OF 2025:
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Manish Shah for the petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel Ms. Maithili Mehta for the respondent.
2. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged legality and validity of the order dated 16.10.2024 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot (for short ‘the Tribunal’) in Misc. Application No. 8/RJT/2022 arising out of Cross Objection No.1/Rjt/2004.
3. Having regard to the controversy involved which is in narrow compass, with the consent of the learned advocates for the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing.
4. Rule returnable forthwith. Ms. Maithili Mehta, learned Sen
The Tribunal erred by misapplying delay standards and procedural provisions, failing to recognize sufficient cause under Section 253(5) for the petitioner’s late cross-objection.
The ITAT lacks jurisdiction to condone delay in filing a rectification application beyond six months as per Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The court affirmed that the Appellate Court has broad discretion to condone delays in filing cross-objections, especially when justified by unique circumstances such as prolonged stays and the death ....
The court affirmed the power of the Tribunal to rectify its mistake and recall the order under the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act and the Tribunal Rules.
The main legal point established is that the Tribunal should consider the appropriate provisions, such as Rule 24 of the ITAT Rules, when dealing with applications for recalling orders, and the need ....
The right to appeal should not be compromised due to ineffective service of notice, and administrative errors must not preclude access to justice.
A change in law cannot serve as grounds for reviewing previous Tribunal rulings, reaffirming that adjudications must follow the law as it was at the time of the original decision.
Order passed under Rule 13 of Order 9 of CPC rejecting application for an order to set aside a decree passed ex parte, appeal would lie under Order XLIII Rule 1 (d) of CPC.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
