TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (9) TMI 56
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h sides, main writ petition is taken up, heard out and is being disposed of. 3. An order dated 04.03.2019 bearing reference C.No.217/264/Pr.CIT-1/2017-18 (hereinafter 'impugned order' for brevity) made by the 1st respondent in the instant writ petition has been called in question. 4. Impugned order has been made by 1st respondent under Section 264 of 'Income Tax Act, 1961' ['IT Act' for brevity]. To be noted, section 264 of IT Act provides for revision and in the instant case, an assessment order dated 29.12.2017 qua the writ petitioner for the Assessment Year 2011-2012 was sought to be revised vide a revision application filed before the 1st respondent on 25.06.2018 and the impugned order came to be passed in this....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he 1st respondent himself or he can cause the same to be made. In the instant case, though it is not statutorily imperative as there is no impediment, the 1st respondent has chosen to give an opportunity of personal hearing. From the case file placed before this Court, it comes to light that 1st respondent has fixed the personal hearing on 14.12.2018 at 4.00 p.m in his office and has sent a communication to the writ petitioner regarding this on 03.12.2018. In this communication, writ petitioner was also directed to file written submissions and an affidavit saying that he would not be preferring an appeal against the assessment order dated 29.12.2017, which is sought to be revised. To be noted, this condition of the assessee, not filing an a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cal grounds. The 1st respondent has held that delay condonation is accepted. If writ petitioner seeking condonation of delay was not necessary, this exercise was equally unnecessary. The first page of impugned order which gives particulars which gives basic details regarding revision also mentions 'Petition for condonation of delay filed on 11.02.2019'. Delay condonation prayer having been acceded to, writ petitioner was awaiting further communication fixing a personal hearing for main revision (as 1st respondent Revisional Authority has in his discretion chosen to give personal hearing in this case) is learned writ petitioner counsel's say. 10. Learned Revenue counsel, pointed out that the 03.12.2018 communication referred to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re, the following order is passed: (a)Impugned order bearing reference C.No.217/264/Pr.CIT-1/2017-18 dated 04.03.2019 made by the 1st respondent is set aside. It is made clear that impugned order is set aside on the ground that it has erroneously taken up a petition for condonation of non-existent delay, condoned the same and passed orders on merits. In other words, no opinion is expressed on the merits of the matter. (b) As personal hearing has already been afforded to the writ petitioner, personal hearing is now fixed on 04.09.2019 (Wednesday) at 4.00 p.m in the office of the 1st respondent. Writ petitioner undertakes to attend the personal hearing without fail. In the personal hearing, on 04.09.2019, writ petitioner also undertakes t....