High CourtsDivision Bench(2009) 07 DEL CK 0352

R.C. Sabharwal vs Commissioner of Income Tax

Delhi High Court · Decided on 29 July 2009

HON’BLE JUDGES
Valmiki J Mehta, J · A.K. Sikri, J
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
IT Appeal No''s. 870 to 879 of 2009 and CM No''s. 10295 to 10304 of 2009

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 252 words
1.

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) had dismissed appeals of the appellants/assesses. Against the orders of ITAT, the appeals u/s 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are preferred by the assessees, which pending consideration before this Court. Those appeals are coming up for hearing on 14-9-2009. On premise that there were some errors apparent on the face or record, these assessee also moved applications u/s 254 of the Income Tax Act before Tribunal. The Tribunal has, vide impugned orders dt. 30-6-2009, dismissed those applications and the present appeals are filed against said orders of dismissal. Since, plea of the appellants was that there is an apparent error in the orders passed by the Tribunal, which orders are already subject matter of appeal before this Court, it would be open to the appellants to urge those grounds while arguing the said appeals.

2.

The Tribunal, application of appellants u/s 254 of the Income Tax Act, has inter alia observed that it is not open to go into merits of case again and come to a finding different from the one already arrived at and if view taken by, Tribunal erroneous, remedy lies in filing an appeal against impugned orders passed by the Tribunal and those orders are already subject matter of appeal, as mentioned above. In these circumstances, while reserving the right of the appellants to urge the grounds pointing out the purported errors apparent on face of record in impugned orders while arguing those appeals, these appeals are disposed of.