Case Note & Summary
The appellant, M/s. Daryapur Shetkari Sahakari Ginning and Pressing Factory, a cooperative society, filed three appeals before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, challenging a common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Nagpur, dated 1-2-2013. The ITAT had dismissed the appellant's appeals for the assessment years 2002-03, 2003-04, and 2004-05 in limine on the ground that none appeared on behalf of the assessee, indicating lack of interest in prosecuting the appeals. The appellant had earlier challenged assessment orders passed under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act before the Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur, which were dismissed, leading to further appeals before the ITAT. The substantial question of law framed was whether the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the proceedings in limine contrary to Rule 24 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. The appellant's counsel argued that under Rule 24, the Tribunal is duty-bound to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the respondent if the appellant fails to appear, relying on precedents including Commissioner of Income Tax v. S. Chenniappa Mudaliar, Balaji Steel Re-rolling Mills v. Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, and Khushalchand B. Daga v. T. K. Surendran. The respondent's counsel supported the Tribunal's order. The High Court analyzed Rule 24 and held that it requires the Tribunal to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the respondent when the appellant is absent. The impugned order dismissing the appeals in limine was contrary to the rule. The court set aside the ITAT order and remitted the appeals back to the Tribunal for fresh disposal on merits in accordance with law, directing the parties to appear before the Tribunal on a specified date. The appeals were allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Income Tax - Appellate Tribunal - Dismissal in Limine - Rule 24 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 - The Tribunal dismissed appeals for non-appearance of assessee without hearing on merits. Held that Rule 24 mandates the Tribunal to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the respondent if the appellant fails to appear. Dismissal in limine is contrary to the rule. (Paras 4-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the proceedings in limine contrary to the provisions of Rule 24 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963?
Final Decision
Appeals allowed. Impugned order dated 1-2-2013 set aside. Appeals remitted to ITAT for fresh disposal on merits in accordance with law. Parties to appear before ITAT on 21-12-2020. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Rule 24 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules
- 1963
- duty to decide on merits
- dismissal in limine improper
- natural justice
