Appeals by Revenue against Tribunal orders dismissing appeals for technical defects. High Court restored appeals, condoned delay, and directed Tribunal to decide on merits.
Impugned order set aside; Tribunal directed to condone delay, number appeals, and decide on merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras
Dated : 02.9.2020
Coram :
The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM
and
The Honourable Mrs.Justice PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
Tax Case Appeal Nos.259 to 261 &
CMP.Nos.9278 & 9283 of 2020
Ms.K.Neelavathy
...Appellant in all cases
Vs
The Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Non Corporate Ward 1(4), Chennai-34.
...Respondent in all cases
APPEALS under Section 27A of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 against the common order dated 31.12.2018 made respectively in WTA.Nos. 83, 81 and 82/Chny/2018 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench respectively for the assessment years 2003-04, 2001-02 and 2002-03.
Against the order dated 16/04/2018 made in ITA Nos. 359 to 361/14 on the file of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax(Appeals)-2, Chennai, for the assessment year 2001-02 to 2003-04.
Against the order dated 24/03/06 made in PAN GIR No. 21705N/ADHPN4842M on the file of the Joint Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Cuddalore for the assesment year 2003-04, 2001-02 and 200203.
For Appellant : Mr.V.S.Jayakumar
For Respondent : Mrs.R.Hemalatha, SSC
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J)
We have heard Mr.V.S.Jayakumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant – assessee and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel accepting notice for the respondent – Revenue.
“1. Whether the Tribunal is right in law in dismissing the appeal ex parte without giving adequate opportunity of being heard ?
reasons:
“2. All the appeals of the assessee are found to have been filed late by 15 days before the Tribunal. However, the assessee has filed the condonation petition in the form of an affidavit to condone the delay of ten days only. The above defect was duly notified in the defect memo served on the assessee through registered post. However, the assessee has not come forward to rectify
the defect. Moreover, despite service of notice (RPAD on record), none appeared on behalf of the assessee or filed any adjournment petition. Since the assessee has not rectified the defect notified by the Tribunal, all the appeals filed by the assessee are not maintainable and accordingly, all the appeals are dismissed.”
individual and the disputed/undisputed delay is either 10 days or 15 days, we exercise our discretion and condone the delay.
Assistant Registrar
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
RS
To
1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench.
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Non Corporate Ward 1(4), Chennai-34.
3.The Joint Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Cuddalore.
+1cc to Mr.V.S.Jayakumar, Advocate, SR. No.28524
+1cc to Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, Advocate, SR. No. 28528
TCA.Nos.259 to 261 of 2020 & CMP.Nos.9278 & 9283 of 2020
RSV(CO) RN(08/12/2020)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal was right in dismissing theRevenue's appeals ex parte on technical defects without affording an opportunity to be heard.
Whether the Tribunal was justified in not dealing with the merits of the case.
Whether the delay in filing the appeals should be condoned.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
K.Neelavathy
Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Non Corporate Ward 1(4), Chennai-34
T.S. SIVAGNANAM
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
