2025 (9) TMI 307

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....SC, ITD, Advocate. Income Tax appearing for Williamson Financial Services Limited. ORDER PER (M. ZOTHANKHUMA, J) Heard Dr. A. Saraf, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. S. Chetia, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2. No one appears for the respondent No. 1, as no notice had been issued to the said respondent. 2. The applicants are seeking expunction of the adverse remarks and observations given by this Court in the common judgment and order dated 24.09.2024 passed in ITA Nos. 2/2024, 4/2024, 6/2024 and 7/2024. The applicant No. 1 is the Judicial Member of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata, whereas the applicant No.2 is the Account Member, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 3. The applicants' counsel subm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ncome Tax (Central) (supra), the same Tribunal had passed a decision in line with the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of some other assessee/appeal. However, the learned Tribunal rejected the rectification applications submitted against the order dated 06.07.2022 passed by the learned Tribunal earlier. 6. The respondent/assessee, who was aggrieved by the order dated 06.07.2022 passed by the learned Tribunal, approached this Court by way of ITA Nos. 2/2024, 4/2024, 6/2024 and 7/2024. This Court, vide the judgment and order dated 24.09.2024, disposed of the above Income Tax Appeals, on the ground that the learned Tribunal could not have taken different views in respect of different appeals, by holding that the explanation inse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... superior Court however strongly he may feel about the unmerited and fallacious order passed by an officer, is required to maintain sobriety, calmness, dispassionate reasoning and poised restraint. In the case of Om Prakash Chautala Vs. Kanwar Bhan and others, reported in (2014) 5 SCC 417, the Supreme Court has held that when a Court deals with a matter, which is likely to affect a person's reputation and caustic observations are made, which are not necessary, it can hurt a man. The reputation of a person should not be allowed to be sullied with passage of time. In the case of Prakash Singh Teji vs. Northern India Goods Transport Company Private Limited and another, reported in (2009) 12 SCC 577, the Supreme Court has held that it is settle....