2015 (10) TMI 399 - HC - Income Tax

High Court Condoned Delay in Review Applications under Section 260A

The judgment addressed the delay in filing review applications, the maintainability of reviews under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, the High Court's ... Review application - Withdrawal of the certificate given under section 12-A - - Held that:- We are inclined to hold, and accordingly hold, that the review applications are maintainable to correct the errors apparent on the face of record. Although, many a grounds have been taken by the review applicant, but we have not been persuaded by learned counsel for the review-applicant to take a view that there is an error apparent on the face of record to justify the review applications. All the aforesaid review applications are, therefore, dismissed. Issues:Delay in filing review applications, maintainability of review against judgment under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, power of High Court to entertain review applications, principles analogous to Section 21 of CPC in review proceedings.Delay in Filing Review Applications:The judgment addresses a delay of 671 days in filing review applications. The reasons for the delay provided by the appellant were considered satisfactory, leading to the condonation of the delay. The delay condonation applications were allowed, and the review applications were consequently allowed to proceed.Maintainability of Review Against Judgment Under Section 260A:The respondents argued against the maintainability of a review under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, citing a decision of the Bombay High Court. However, the review applicant relied on a Full Bench decision of the Patna High Court, supported by a Supreme Court judgment, to establish that the High Court can entertain review applications arising from judgments under Section 260A.Power of High Court to Entertain Review Applications:The judgment delves into the High Court's inherent powers to correct errors apparent on the face of the record. It references a Full Bench decision of the Patna High Court, which emphasized the High Court's duty to maintain accurate records and the plenary power to correct any apparent errors. This power includes the authority to review judgments under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, as confirmed by the Gujarat High Court judgment.Principles Analogous to Section 21 of CPC in Review Proceedings:The judgment further discusses the application of principles akin to Section 21 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) in various legal proceedings, including reviews. It cites the Gujarat High Court judgment, which supports the extension of these principles to review proceedings, not limited to those arising from the CPC. The court concludes that review applications are maintainable to rectify errors apparent on the record, even though in this specific case, the review applications were dismissed due to the lack of justification for the errors claimed.In summary, the judgment addresses the delay in filing review applications, the maintainability of reviews under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, the High Court's power to entertain review applications, and the application of principles analogous to Section 21 of the CPC in review proceedings. While the delay was condoned, the court ultimately dismissed the review applications due to the lack of convincing evidence of errors on the face of the record.