Supreme Court Of India
Mathur Marketing (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT, Delhi
Section 260A, 251
R.K. Agrawal And Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, JJ.
Civil Appeal No. 3067 Of 2007
September 12, 2017
1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.
2. Vide order dated 10.08.2017, this Court had permitted the appellant to examine as to whether the oral arguments were advanced on substantial question No.3 raised in the Memo of Appeal filed before the High Court under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
3. An affidavit has been filed on behalf of the appellant in which it has been stated that the issue of powers of Commissioner (Appeals) had come in appeal under Rule 46A and were specifically raised before the High Court.
4. In that view of the matter, in our considered opinion, if indeed such issue was raised specifically before the High Court and it has not been taken into consideration by the High Court by passing the impugned order dated 17.01.2006, the appropriate remedy for the appellant would be to file an application for review of the said order.
5. Accordingly, we permit the appellant to file a review application before the High Court within two weeks from today. If such an application is filed, the same shall be considered in accordance with law without raising the question of limitation.
6. All the questions raised in this appeal are left open to be raised again, if occasion so arises.
7. The Civil Appeal is disposed of with aforesaid observations.
[Citation : 400 ITR 26]