SC orders a rehearing as the presiding judge has retired and there are insufficient reasons in the order
Manesh Dayashankar Madeka Vs ACIT Circle 1(1) & Anr. (Supreme Court of India)
Facts:
- The appellant had filed a writ petition seeking various reliefs related to notices issued under section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and orders disposing of objections.
- The impugned notices were dated 29/9/2020, and the order dated 01/09/2021 disposed of objections. Show Cause Notices for A.Y. 2016-17, A.Y. 2017-18, and A.Y. 2018-19 were also issued on 01/09/2021.
Observations:
- The High Court, in its order, noted the prayers of the petitioner and mentioned that the petition was not entertained.
- The order stated that the reasons for not entertaining the petition would be provided later due to a shortage of time.
- It was highlighted that the Presiding Judge of the Division Bench had retired.
Conclusion:
- The Supreme Court set aside the impugned order, emphasizing that the writ petition was not entertained by the High Court.
- The matter was remanded to the High Court for a re-hearing since no reasons were provided for not entertaining the petition, and the Presiding Judge had retired.
- The writ petition was restored on the High Court’s file for re-hearing, and an order was to be passed in accordance with the law along with reasons.
- The appeal was disposed of with the direction for a re-hearing in the High Court.
You must be logged in to post a comment.