Case Details

Citation(s)
1972 SLG 509 1972 SLD 509 (1972) 85 ITR 48
Bombay High Court
MISC. PETITION No. 945 OF 1969, NOVEMBER 26, 1970
TULZAPURKAR, J.
F.S. Nariman, N.A. Palkhivala and S.P. Mehta for the Petitioner. R.J. Joshi for respondent

Khushalchand B. Daga

VS

T.K. Surendran, 4th Income Tax Officer

Law:

Section:

Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 33(4) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922], read with rule 24 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1946 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment year 1955-56 - Tribunal dismissed petitioner/assessee's appeal for default of appearance - Subsequently, Supreme Court in CIT v. Chenniappa Mudaliar [1969]74 ITR 41 declared rule 24, in so far as it enabled dismissal of appeal before Tribunal for default of appearance of appellant, as ultra vires - Relying on said decision, assessee filed application before Tribunal to set aside its earlier order and rehear appeal on merits - - However Tribunal dismissed said application - Whether Tribunal's orders dismissing assessee's appeal for default of appearance was an order passed without jurisdiction and, therefore, a nullity and, as such, Tribunal should be directed to rehear appeal - Held, yes FACTS The assessee's appeal before Tribunal was fixed for hearing on 24-10-1961. Despite service of notice neither the assessee nor his tax advisor could appear before the Tribunal on the aforesaid date. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal for default of appearance. According to the assessee, the aforesaid order of the Tribunal was not served upon him nor on his tax advisor and he came to know of the said order for the first time on 4-1-1968, when one of his representatives learnt about this order while he was making search of the records of the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1955-56 in connection with certain refund vouchers. He filed application before the Tribunal on 29-1-1968 for setting aside the said order dated 24-10-1961, and seeking a rehearing of the appeal on merits. On 17-4-1968, the Tribunal rejected the application on the ground that there had been enormous delay in filing the application for restoration; the Tribunal did not accept the petitioner's case that it was on 4-1-1968, that he came to know about the dismissal of his appeal. Thereafter, on 24-2-1969, the Supreme Court delivered its in the case of CIT v. Chenniappa Mudaliar [1969] 74 ITR 41 ; [1969] 3 SCR 818 confirming the decision of the Madras High Court in the same matter to the…
πŸ”’
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492