| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 5006 (Bom-HC) : (2021) 432 ITR 0130 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Rule 24
In view of language used in rule 24, Tribunal was not justified in dismissing the appeals for absence of assessee in limine and it ought to have decided the appeals on merits even if the assessee or his representative was not present when the appeals were taken up for hearing.
|
Appeal (Tribunal) - Validity of order of Tribunal - Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine due to absence of assessee. -
Assessee contended that Tribunal had dismissed all of its appeals by common order on the ground that none appeared on behalf of the assessee which meant that assessee was not interested in prosecuting these appeals. Issue was as to whether Tribunal was justified in dismissing the proceedings in limine contrary to the provisions of rule 24 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. Held Order passed by Tribunal thereby dismissing the appeals in limine for non-appearance of assessee holding that it was not interested in prosecuting the appeals was unsustainable. Tribunal was duty bound to decide the appeals on merits after hearing revenue. In view of language used in rule 24, Tribunal was not justified in dismissing the appeals for absence of assessee in limine and it ought to have decided the appeals on merits even if the assessee or his representative was not present when the appeals were taken up for hearing.
Followed:CIT, Madras v. S. Chenniappa Mudaliar (1969) 74 ITR 41 (SC) : 1969 TaxPub(DT) 341 (SC).
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. : 2002-03 to 2004-05
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|