TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 426
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....kha Rastogi, Mr. Abhiraj, Advocates Respondents Through: Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with Ms. Nidhi Raman, CGSC along with Mr. Amit Gupta, Mr. Rishav Dubey, Mr. Saurabh Tripathi, Ms. Rupali Kapoor, Mr. Zubin Singh, Advocates for UOI Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Vipul Aggarwal, Mr. Parth Semwal, Advocates JUDGMENT 1. The Appellants seek to challenge the common judgment dated 04.05.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the Writ Petitions bearing Nos. W.P.(C) 12846/2021, W.P.(C) 12847/2021 and W.P.(C) 12853/2021. 2. The Appellants had filed the said Writ Petitions praying for the following relief: "a. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of a Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ections thereby laying down guidelines for the Respondent No. 1 that during issuing transfer orders, the same should have a provision that the concerned Authority / Tribunal Member / etc. shall be authorized to pass judgments within a relevant period of time in the matters which have already been reserved for judgment;" 3. Shorn of details, the facts in brief, leading to the present appeals are as follows:- i. It is stated that on 10.08.2019, provisional Attachment Orders were passed by the Initiating Officer under the Prohibition for Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 (hereinafter called as 'Benami Act'). ii. It is stated that Section 7 of the Benami Act was amended by Section 155 of the Finance Act, 2021, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....2022 for pronouncing the judgments in cases where hearings had been concluded and orders were reserved. viii. It is pertinent to mention that the Ministry of Finance had earlier issued a notification dated 27.02.2021, wherein time to deliver judgments by the Adjudicating Authority had been extended till 30.09.2021. It is also pertinent to mention that the Adjudicating Authority, Mumbai, who had been given additional charge did not deliver its judgment till 31.03.2022. ix. It is stated that Office Order No.270/2021 dated 08.10.2021 was notified by the Ministry of Finance appointing Mr. Sanjog Kapoor to the post of Member, Adjudicating Authority at New Delhi and, thereby the additional charge given to the Adjudicating Autho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... been placed on the judgments of the Apex Court in Gullapalli Nageswara Rao & Ors. v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation & Anr., AIR 1959 SC 308 and State of M.P. v. Bhooraji & Ors., (2001) 7 SCC 679. 6. The facts in the present cases reveal that Mr. Hari Govind Singh was the Adjudicating Authority, Mumbai, and was given only additional charge to function as the Adjudicating Authority, New Delhi. On the day Mr. Sanjog Kapoor was appointed as an Adjudicating Authority, New Delhi on 08.10.2021, Mr. Hari Govind Singh had not pronounced the judgment in the cases pertaining to the Appellants and, therefore, on 08.10.2021, Mr. Hari Govind Singh ceased to function as the competent authority for New Delhi. Viewed in this light, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dl. Sessions Judge is in terms of Section 353 CrPC. The delay in pronouncing the judgment is a mere irregularity and is hereby condoned. 155. Notwithstanding validity of Note 2, the impugned judgment is also protected by Sections 462 and 465 CrPC and the de facto doctrine." (emphasis supplied) 9. Similarly, the facts of State of M.P. v. Bhooraji & Ors., (2001) 7 SCC 679 also do not apply to the present cases. 10. The notification dated 17.09.2021, would apply to such of those officers who had reserved orders, but had not pronounced it within the time as stipulated by the notification. The said notification cannot be extended to an officer who has ceased to occupy the post. Further, the notification dated 17.09.2021 only exten....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (A) where the specified Act is the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) (hereinafter referred to as the Income-tax Act) and, -- (a) the completion of any action, referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the said Act, relates to passing of any order for imposition of penalty under Chapter XXI of the Income-tax Act, - (i) the 30th day of March, 2022 shall be the end date of the period during which the time limit specified in, or prescribed or notified under, the Income-tax Act falls for the completion of such action; and (ii) the 31st day of March, 2022 shall be the end date to which the time-limit for completion of such action shall stand extended; (b) the compliance of any action, referr....