S PANNEERSELVAM Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the Writ Petitions are filed to issue Writ of Certiorarified mandamus, calling for records in M.P.No,92/2003 (38/Mds/2001 in I.T.A.Nos.2501/Mds/1993) and M.P.No,92/2003 (38/Mds/2001 in I.T.A.Nos.2502/Mds/1993) respectively on the file of the second respondent and quash the orders dated 26.12.2005 and direct the second respondent to dispose of the claims for rectification of the order passed in I.T.A.No,2501/Mds/1993 and I.T.A.2502/Mds/1993.

(2.) WHEN the matters were listed on 19.10.2009, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Today also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Mr.K.Subramanian, learned counsel appearing for the Department/first respondent present and the matter is taken up and disposed off on merits.

(3.) ON going through the averments made in the affidavits filed in support of the writ petitions, it is clear that the writ petitioner has at the first instance filed an application MP No.17/2001 for rectification which has been allowed on 25.4.2001. Thereafter, after more than two years, petitioner filed another rectification petition for rectifying the original order of the appellate tribunal dated 27.11.2000.