Supreme Court clarifies amendment process in tax appeals

The Supreme Court granted leave in special leave petitions challenging an interim order in ITA Nos. 1394-1395 of 2006. The issue was the validity of amending the memorandum of appeal to include a ground related to a judgment from another appeal. The Court ruled that the amendment should be considered during the appeal hearing and clarified that the question of law incorporation without challenging the other tribunal's judgment would be addressed then. The Court modified the High Court's order, disposing of the appeals without costs.

---

---

Issues:
1. Validity of amending the memorandum of appeal to include a ground pertaining to a judgment passed in another appeal.
2. Consideration of whether a substantial question of law can be incorporated through an amendment in an appeal without challenging the other judgment of the tribunal.
3. Modification of the order to address the issue at the time of the concerned appeal hearing.

Detailed Analysis:
The Supreme Court granted leave in both special leave petitions challenging the interim order dated 11.2.2013 in ITA Nos. 1394-1395 of 2006. The appellant argued that amending the memorandum of appeal to include a ground related to a judgment from another appeal, where no appeal was filed by the revenue, was legally impermissible. On the contrary, the respondents supported the tribunal's order. After hearing both parties, the Court decided to modify the order. The Court ruled that the amendment for incorporation of a substantial question of law should be considered during the hearing of the concerned appeal. The Court clarified that the issue of incorporating such an amendment without challenging the other tribunal's judgment would be addressed during the appeal hearing. The Court also addressed the appellant's concern that allowing the amendment might render the opposition regarding the lack of appeal against both tribunal judgments futile. Therefore, the Court modified the High Court's order accordingly. The appeals were disposed of with no costs awarded.

---