| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1992 SLG 1777 1992 SLD 1777 (1992) 197 ITR 263 |
Orissa High Court
A. PASAYAT AND S.K. MOHANTY, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
A. PASAYAT AND S.K. MOHANTY, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Commissioner of Wealth Tax
v.
Law:
Section:
Section 35(1)(e) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 - Rectification of mistakes - Apparent from record - Tribunal did not accept assessee's contentions challenging mode of valuation of his residential house - Subsequently assessee, however, filed an application under section 35(1)(e) on basis of which Tribunal recalled its order after accepting assessee's affidavit as correct - Whether in view of fact that no reason was indicated by Tribunal for exercise of powers under section 35(1)(e), aforesaid order was unsustainable - Held, yes FACTS The assessee urged before the Tribunal that his house was partly used as residence-cum-office and, therefore, the valuation should be made in terms of rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules. Similarly, the assessee challenged the mode of valuation of his another property. The Tribunal did not accept the assessee's contentions. The assessee filed an application under section 35(1)(e) submitting, inter alia, that contrary to the indication by the Bench hearing the appeal that the order shall be set aside and the matter remanded to the AAC, the appeal had been dismissed. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's affidavit filed in this behalf as correct and recalled its earlier order. On writ petition by the revenue: HELD The Tribunal did not consider the applicability of section 35(1)(e) and by an unreasoned order had disposed of the matter. The affidavit filed by the assessee was termed as 'correct', without indication as to what constituted correctness, and also how the same had relevance to the question of applicability of section 35(1)(e). It merely quoted the application, prayer and affidavit and abruptly came to the conclusion that it accepted the affidavit as correct. The scope of section 35 is limited to rectification of mistakes and not to review or revise. The mistake apparent from the record is a mistake that is manifest, plain or obvious and one which can be realised without a debate. The mistake must be evident from the records of the case and not one which can be collected by a process of elucidation or argument. In the instant case, there was no indication in the order regarding any such mistake. No reason had been indicated for…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492