COURT: | Bombay High Court |
CORAM: | M. S. Sanklecha J, N. M. Jamdar J |
SECTION(S): | 254(1), 43B |
GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
CATCH WORDS: | strictures |
COUNSEL: | Dr. K. Shivram, Rahul Hakani, Sashank Dandu |
DATE: | August 27, 2019 (Date of pronouncement) |
DATE: | September 7, 2019 (Date of publication) |
AY: | 2007-08 |
FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
CITATION: | |
S. 254(1): The Tribunal should not make general observations that there are "contrary decisions". This statement led us to direct counsel to examine the law and bring to our attention any decision contrary to the view taken by the Supreme Court in Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills 123 ITR 429 etc. We are now informed by Counsel that there are no contrary decisions. All this effort and time would have been saved if the Tribunal had made specific reference to contrary decisions or not stated so in the absence of referring to the citations. We request the Tribunal to be specific about the decisions and make a mention of the citation in the order and not make general observations |
All this effort and time would have been saved if the Tribunal had made specific reference to contrary decisions or not stated so in the absence of referring to the citations. Therefore, we would request the Tribunal to be specific about the decisions and make a mention of the citation in the order and not make general observations as in this case.
Recent Comments