RAMESH CHANDER SABHARWAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VIII
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the assessees could raise the grounds of alleged errors in their pending appeals against the original ITAT orders. Therefore, the appeals against the dismissal of the Section 254 applications were disposed of.
What were the facts?
The assessees filed applications before the ITAT under Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, alleging errors apparent on the face of the record in previous ITAT orders. The ITAT dismissed these applications, stating it could not revisit the merits of the case.
What were the issues?
Whether the ITAT can entertain applications for rectification of errors apparent on the face of the record when appeals against the original orders are already pending before the High Court.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . 29.07.2009 60 to 69# . Present: Mr. O.S. Bajpai, Sr. Adv. with Mr. B.K. Singh for the appellant. Mr. Paras Choudhry for the respondent. . . + ITA No. 870/2009 and CM No. 10295/2009 ITA No. 871/2009 and CM No. 10296/2009 ITA No. 872/2009 and CM No. 10297/2009 ITA No. 873/2009 and CM No. 10298/2009 ITA No. 874/2009 and CM No. 10299/2009 (Common Order) ITA No. 875/2009 and CM No. 10300/2009 . . ITA No. 876/2009 and CM No. 10301/2009 ITA No. 877/2009 and CM No. 10302/2009 ITA No. 878/2009 and CM No. 10303/2009 ITA No. 879/2009 and CM No. 10304/2009 The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) had dismissed the appeals of these appellants/assessees. Against the orders of ITAT, the appeals under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are preferred by the assessees, which are pending consideration before this Court. Those appeals are coming up for hearing on 14th September 2009. On the premise that there were some errors apparent on the face of record, these assessees also moved applications under Section 254 of the Income Tax Act before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has, vide impugned orders dt. 30.06.2009, 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. The Tribunal, while rejecting the application of the appellants under Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, has inter alia observed that it is not open to go into the merits of the case again and come to a finding different from the one already arrived at and if the view taken by the Tribunal is erroneous, remedy lies in filing an appeal against the 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 the face of the record in the impugned orders while arguing those appeals, these appeals are disposed of. . A.K. SIKRI, J. . . . VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J. July 29, 2009 nsk .
More judgments on Section 260-A
- Rijwan vs Income Tax OfficerITA/3/202023 Sept 2026
- Manoj Gupta vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)…ITA/243/202618 Sept 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs Income Tax Officer, JammuITA/20/20142 Apr 2026
- Late Shri Gopaliyengar Madabushi Muralidhar vs The Income Tax OfficerITA/16/202526 Feb 2026
- Shri K. Samba Siva Rao ( HUF), Hyd vs I.T.O., HydITTA/181/20109 Feb 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Saraswati Enterprises vs. State Of RajasthanRajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026