2009 (5) TMI 40

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nsel - D.D. Chopra JUDGMENT Notice on behalf of the respondents has been accepted by Sri D.D. Chopra. With the consent of the parties' counsel, the writ petitions are being disposed of finally at the admission stage. These are two writ petitions, which challenge the order dated 17.3.09 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax separately, in respect of assessment year 1999-2000 and 2001....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pect to assessment year 1999-2000 in both the writ petitions, a common plea has been raised that the Commissioner of Income Tax committed manifest error of law in refusing to entertain the revision on the ground that the revision is not a substitute to appeal and that the petitioner should have availed the remedy of appeal, particularly when for some assessment years appeals were filed. Section....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r under this section in the following cases - (a) where an appeal against the order lies to the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) or to the Commissioner (Appeals) or to the Appellate Tribunal but has not been made and the time within which such appeal may be made has not expired, or, in the case of an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) or to the Appellate Tribunal, the assessee has not waived his....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Commissioner in the instant case was swayed by the fact that the revision under Section 264 is not a substitute of appeal. This is not the correct interpretation of Section 264. The other ground was that the assessee, namely, the petitioners have chosen to file appeal against assessment in the previous and the subsequent assessment years and, therefore, there is every likelihood for having conf....