2018 (8) TMI 577
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ORDER P. C. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges the order dated 23rd April, 2015 passed by the Income-Tax Settlement Commission (the Commission). The impugned order dated 23rd April, 2015 has been passed under Section 245(D)(4) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). 2. The challenge to the impugned order dated 23rd April, 2015 which was received by the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion . However, the same is inter-alia to be examined in the context of the legislation under which the order is passed. Therefore, keeping the above broad parameters in mind, we shall examine the reason for the delay. 4. Mr. Mohanty, Learned Counsel appearing in support of the petition, submits that, this delay on the part of the petitioners was essentially in view of the fact that the persons r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thout jurisdiction and/or contrary to the Statute. This not taking action is evidence of negligence or caring less about this issue. The extra-ordinary writ jurisdiction is to be exercised only in case of parties whose conduct would evidence that the party was serious about the challenge and acted expeditiously to set right an injustice perceived by him. The extra-ordinary jurisdiction cannot be e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....galore, (1988) 2 Supreme Court Cases 142, (ii) State of U.P. and Others Versus. Harish Chandra and Others, (1996) 9 Supreme Court Cases 309 and (iii) State of Haryana Versus. Chandra Mani and Others, (1996) 3 Supreme Court Cases 132 will not apply to the present facts. In all the above cases, the Parliament/Legislature had provided for Appeals under the Statute and/or period of limitation either u....
TaxTMI
TaxTMI