Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the High Court, in exercising its advisory jurisdiction under the Income-tax Act, had inherent power to delete an accidental sentence from its earlier judgment.
Analysis: The sentence sought to be deleted was found to have crept into the earlier judgment by accident and was capable of creating a wrong impression if read out of context. The Court held that it had not decided the assessee's liability to penalty on merits, but only answered the referred question on the applicability of the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It further held that a High Court, as a court of record, possesses inherent power to correct accidental slips or omissions so that no party suffers from an error in the judgment.
Conclusion: The petition was allowed and the offending sentence was deleted from the earlier judgment.
Final Conclusion: The judgment affirms the Court's power to remove an accidental and misleading statement from its own earlier order in order to prevent injustice.
Ratio Decidendi: A court of record has inherent power to correct an accidental slip or omission in its judgment, even in advisory proceedings, where necessary to prevent injustice and to preserve the true effect of the decision.