Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

SC directs HC to rehearing due to lack of reasons in order & retirement of Presiding Judge

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2023 taxguru.in 7902
Case Name
Manesh Dayashankar Madeka Vs ACIT Circle 1(1) & Anr. (Supreme Court of India)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Advertisement


Manesh Dayashankar Madeka Vs ACIT Circle 1(1) & Anr. (Supreme Court of India)

Introduction: In a significant legal development, the Supreme Court of India has granted leave in the case of Manesh Dayashankar Madeka Vs ACIT Circle 1(1) & Anr. The writ petition, challenging the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) order, faced an unexpected twist as it was not entertained by the High Court due to the retirement of the Presiding Judge.

Detailed Analysis: The petitioner sought various reliefs, including quashing notices under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and challenging the order disposing of objections along with show-cause notices for specific assessment years. However, the High Court, on 27.9.2021, did not entertain the petition, and no reasons were provided at that time. Notably, the Presiding Judge of the Division Bench had retired.

The Supreme Court, upon hearing the senior counsel for both parties, set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the High Court. The writ petition is to be reheard, and a new order, supported by reasons, is to be passed in accordance with the law. The Court emphasized the need for a fresh hearing due to the retirement of the Presiding Judge and the lack of reasons in the previous disposition.

Conclusion: In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s decision to direct the rehearing of the writ petition underscores the importance of a fair and thorough consideration of legal matters. The impact of the retirement of the Presiding Judge on the initial non-entertainment of the petition raises questions about procedural fairness. As the case returns to the High Court, it opens a new chapter in the legal proceedings, highlighting the complexities and nuances of the judicial process in tax matters. The legal community awaits the outcome of the rehearing and the issuance of a fresh order supported by comprehensive reasons.

FULL TEXT OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT/ORDER

Leave granted.

Heard learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent drew our attention to the impugned order which reads as under:

“1. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:

A) Issue a writ of certiorari and/or a writ of mandamus and/or any other writ direction or order to quash and set aside the impugned notices dated 29/9/2020 u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 at Annexure ‘B colly’ and the order dated 01/09/2021 disposing off the objections at Annexure-’G’ along with the show Cause Notices issued for A.Y. 2016- 17, A.Y. 2017-18 and A.Y. 2018-19 dated 01/09/2021 annexed herewith as Annexure-”H Colly’.

B) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present petition, ad-interim relief be granted and the implementation, operation and execution of the impugned notices dated 29/9/2020 u/s 153 C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 at Annexure-’B Colly” the order dated 01/09/2021 disposing off the objections at Annexure-’G’ and the Show Cause Notices issued for A.Y. 2016-17, A.Y. 2017-18 and A.Y. 2018-19 dated 01/09/2021 annexed herewith as Annexure-”H Colly” be stayed until the final outcome of the present petition.

C) Award the cost of this petition.

D) Grant such other and further reliefs as this

Hon’ble Court deems fit.

2. For the reasons to be followed which for the paucity of time, order not being dictated today.

3. The petition is not entertained.”

The aforesaid order speaks itself in as much as the writ petition was not entertained by the High Court for reasons to be followed which due to paucity of time was not dictated on 27.9.2021 on which the matter was disposed of. However, no reasons were dictated at all. It is also brought to our notice that the Presiding Judge of  the Division Bench has also retired. In the circumstances, the writ petition will have to be re-heard. Consequently, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded to the High Court. The writ petition is restored on the file of the High Court to be re-heard and an order to be passed in accordance with law along with reasons.

The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.