Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI • Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions • Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations • Issue-wise legal analysis • Practical arguments and supporting content • Professionally structured draft ready for further review.
High Court quashes ITAT order, deems appeals against Commissioner's orders under I.T. Act Section 119(2)(b) not maintainable. The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing the ITAT's order directing reconsideration of cases and holding that appeals against the ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
High Court quashes ITAT order, deems appeals against Commissioner's orders under I.T. Act Section 119(2)(b) not maintainable.
The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing the ITAT's order directing reconsideration of cases and holding that appeals against the Commissioner's orders under Section 119(2)(b) of the I.T. Act were not maintainable. The Court emphasized that the ITAT lacked jurisdiction in passing the impugned order and that a prior Division Bench decision did not establish a precedent for entertaining such appeals.
Issues: Challenge to ITAT's order directing Commissioner of Income Tax to consider cases afresh, Appeal maintainability against Commissioner's order under Section 119(2)(b) of I.T. Act, Applicability of Division Bench's decision in Special Civil Application No.8003 of 2013.
Analysis: The High Court dealt with a group of petitions where the Commissioner of Income Tax-II challenged the ITAT's order directing reconsideration of cases, including condonation of delay. The Commissioner had rejected applications for regularization of returns under Section 119(2)(b) of the I.T. Act. The ITAT directed fresh consideration, prompting the present challenge by the revenue department (para 2-3).
The petitioner argued that the ITAT erred in entertaining appeals against the Commissioner's administrative order under Section 119(2)(b) of the I.T. Act, which was held as non-appealable. The petitioner contended that the ITAT lacked jurisdiction in passing the impugned order (para 4).
The Court noted that the ITAT's reliance on a Division Bench decision in Special Civil Application No.8003 of 2013 was misplaced. The Division Bench had observed that the Tribunal's order on rectification application suffered legal defects due to the non-maintainability of the appeal against the Commissioner's order. The Division Bench's decision did not establish a precedent for entertaining such appeals (para 6.1).
Ultimately, the Court found in favor of the petitioner, quashing the ITAT's order and ruling that the appeals against the Commissioner's orders were not maintainable. The Court emphasized that the Division Bench's decision did not confer appellate jurisdiction on the ITAT in such cases (para 7).
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
