Back
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (CHENNAI BENCH)
Shri Mahavir Singh, VP, Shri Jagadish, AM
M/s. Deen Dayal Medical and Educational Trust – Appellant
Versus
The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. recall of tribunal order for non-prosecution. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments on derivative rights and timing of applications. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. judicial responsibilities in adjudicating appeals. (Para 5 , 6) |
आदेश /ORDER
PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT:
By way of this petition under Rule 24 of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 (hereinafter the ‘Tribunal Rules’)the assessee wanted to recall the order of the Tribunal dated 31.01.2017 in ITA No.3331/Mds/2016, the appeal was dismissed by Tribunal for non- prosecution of appeal by following the Delhi Tribunal decision in the case of Multiplan (India) Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 and the judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of late Tukojirao Holkar reported in 223 ITR 480.
2. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee Shri N. Arjun Raj pointed out that the Registry has pointed out defect that this miscellaneous application is time barred by 2281 days and condonation petition has not been filed. The ld.counsel for the assessee first of all argued that the condonation provision will not apply to the petition filed u/s.24 of the Tribunal Rules and he narrated the facts.
3. The ld.counsel stated that t
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
