Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
..... (2)scslj 294 stating that the tribunal was not right while deciding the oa on merits, overlooking the statutory provisions contained instructions in section 21(3) of the administrative tribunals act, 1985. shri vadhavkar has argued mat the fixation of specific cut off date for any purpose was not discriminatory as held by the hon'ble supreme court in the case .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
..... concerned so as to grade him in various categories as outstanding, very good, good, satisfactory and average, etc. the competent authority and the reviewing authority have to act fairly or objectively in assessing the character, integrity and performance of the incumbent. it is seen that in the review order, various grounds on which the various ..... technical knowledge. the hon'ble supreme court in the case of m.a. rajasekhar vs. state of karnataka and another (supra) held that the remark does not act dispassionately when faced with dilemma as a inconsistent remark and the intention was to treat it as advisory. the relevant extract from paragraph 4 is set out herein ..... in the assessment orders on the basis of his prima facie opinion. the cit issued notices to the said three assessees under section 263 of the income tax act for review of the income tax assessment. however, after hearing the assessees, the review proceeding was dropped. however, the adverse remarks were retained on the basis .....
Tag this Judgment!