VIKAS DANGAYACH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN many of the above -mentioned cases notices were issued and after service the respondent Department has filed reply also. With the consent of the parties the cases were heard finally along with the fresh similar cases. In fresh cases the copy of writ petition was given to the counsel for the respondent Department and since common question of law based on similar facts are involved, therefore, all the cases have been heard and are being decided together.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioners is that their cases are pending before the ITSC which are required to be decided by 31st March, 2008 as per Section 245D(4A)(i) r/w Section 245HA(iv) of the IT Act, 1961 but the same have not been decided so far and in case the same are further not decided by 31st March, 2008, then the same shall abate by operation of law.

(3.) MR . Singhi, the counsel for the respondent Department submits that time left is too short for deciding these cases and other similar cases pending before the authorities concerned. He further submits that even if the cases are not decided by 31st March, 2008, then the same shall abate but the same will be referred back to the concerned IT authorities.