COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II Vs. RAINBOW AGENCY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present Special Civil Applications under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner-Commissioner of Income Tax-II challenging the impugned order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 08/11/2012 by which the learned tribunal has rectified/modified its earlier interim order dated 17/08/2010 by which the learned tribunal permitted the assessee-original appellant to add the additional ground and re-frame the additional ground, which was permitted to be raised by the original appellant.

(2.) IT appears from the earlier interim order dated 17/08/2010 that on an application submitted by the original appellant-assessee, the original appellant was permitted to add the following additional ground; Whether or not the additional ground in respect of validity of a warrant alleged to be either not issued or issued in joint names and another legal issue of non- issuance of notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 can be raised?

(3.) HEARD Shri K.M. Parikh, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner. As such, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner is not in a position to point out what prejudice will be caused to the department. Ample opportunity will be given to the petitioner to meet with the additional ground, which the original appellant is permitted to raise. We see no reason to interfere with the impugned interim order/interlocutory order passed by the learned tribunal at this stage. However, it is observed that in case any order is adverse to the petitioner, it will always be open to the petitioner to contend and raise the ground, which is raised in the present Special Civil Application at the time of filing of the appeal, which shall be considered in accordance with law and on its own merits.