K. Prabhu v. The Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Non Corporate Ward 1(4), Chennai
[Citation -2020-LL-0925-77]

Citation 2020-LL-0925-77
Appellant Name K. Prabhu
Respondent Name The Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Non Corporate Ward 1(4), Chennai
Court HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Relevant Act Wealth-tax
Date of Order 25/09/2020
Assessment Year 2001-02
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags adequate opportunity • service of notice • non-removal of defect
Bot Summary: Whether the Tribunal is right in law in not giving directions to the Registry to give one more opportunity to the assessee to cure the defects in filing the appeal 3. 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. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals on a technical ground that the defect, which was notified, was not rectified by the assessee. The assessee offered an explanation stating that the authorized representative, while taking the appeal papers to be filed, had met with a minor accident and returned without filing the same and subsequently represented without curing the defects. The assessee complied with the condition imposed and consequently, the appeals have been numbered taking note of the factual position and also the fact that the defect memo issued by the Registrar of the Tribunal was only with regard to the computation of delay in filing. The Tribunal dismissed the matters on such a technical ground and we deem it appropriate to restore the appeals to the file of the Tribunal to enable the Tribunal to take a decision on merits. Accordingly, all these appeals are allowed, the common impugned order in W.T.A Nos.86 to 88/Chny/2018 dated 31.12.2018 are set aside and the Tribunal is directed to condone the delay in filing the appeals, ignore the so called defects whether it is 15 days or 10 days and direct its Registry to number the appeals and after affording an opportunity to both the assessee as well as the Revenue, take a decision on merits and in accordance with law.


TCA.Nos.337-339 of 2020 IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 25.9.2020 CORAM HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN T.C.A.Nos.337 to 339 of 2020 Shri.K.Prabhu ...Appellant Vs Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Non Corporate Ward 1(4), Chennai-34. Respondent APPEALS under Section 27A of Wealth Tax Act, 1957 against common order dated 31.12.2018 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai D Bench in W.T.A.Nos.86 to 88/Chny/ 2018 dated 31.12.2018 for assessment years 2001-02, 2002-03 and 2003-04. For Appellant : Mr.V.S.Jayakumar For Respondent : Ms.R.Hemalatha, SSC COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J) These appeals, filed by assessee under Section 27A of 1/6 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.337-339 of 2020 Wealth Tax Act, 1957 ( Act for brevity), are directed against common order dated 31.12.2018 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench D Chennai in WTA.Nos.86 to 88/Chny/2018 respectively for assessment year 2001-02, 2002-03 and 2003-04. 2. These appeals have been filed by raising following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether Tribunal is right in law in dismissing appeals ex parte without giving adequate opportunity of being heard? 2. Whether Tribunal is right in law in not giving directions to Registry to give one more opportunity to assessee to cure defects in filing appeal? 3. Whether lower authorities have passed impugned orders in accordance with law and well settled principles? 4. Whether Tribunal is right in not dealing with merits of case in impugned wealth tax assessments? 3. Tribunal dismissed appeals on following reasons: 2. All appeals of assessee are found to have been filed late by 15 days before 2/6 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.337-339 of 2020 Tribunal. However, assessee has filed condonation petition in form of affidavit to condone delay of ten days only. above defect was duly notified in defect memo served on assessee through registered post. However, assessee has not come forward to rectify defect. Moreover, despite service of notice (RPAD on record), none appeared on behalf of assessee or filed any adjournment petition. Since assessee has not rectified defect notified by Tribunal, all appeals filed by assessee are not maintainable and accordingly, all appeals are dismissed. 4. From above common order, we find that Tribunal proceeded exparte and had not taken decision on merits. Tribunal dismissed appeals on technical ground that defect, which was notified, was not rectified by assessee. defect appears to be number of days of delay in filing appeal, whether it is 10 days or 15 days. assessee offered explanation stating that authorized representative, while taking appeal papers to be filed, had met with minor accident and returned without filing same and subsequently represented without curing defects. 3/6 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.337-339 of 2020 fact remains that on that day when Tribunal took up matter for consideration, none appeared for assessee. 5. assessee has preferred these appeals with enormous delay of 436 days. Hon ble Division Bench, which heard condone delay petitions took pragmatic view taking note of fact that assessee is individual and condoned delay subject to condition that he should pay sum of Rs.5,000/- for all appeals to Cancer Institute (WIA), Sardar Patel Road, Adayar, Chennai-20. assessee complied with condition imposed and consequently, appeals have been numbered taking note of factual position and also fact that defect memo issued by Registrar of Tribunal was only with regard to computation of delay in filing. 6. This Court is of considered view that lenient approach could have been adopted to enable assessee to rectify defect and matters could have been heard on merits. Nevertheless, Tribunal dismissed matters on such technical ground and we deem it appropriate to restore appeals to file of Tribunal to enable Tribunal to take decision on merits. 4/6 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.337-339 of 2020 7. Accordingly, all these appeals are allowed, common impugned order in W.T.A Nos.86 to 88/Chny/2018 dated 31.12.2018 are set aside and Tribunal is directed to condone delay in filing appeals, ignore so called defects whether it is 15 days or 10 days and direct its Registry to number appeals and after affording opportunity to both assessee as well as Revenue, take decision on merits and in accordance with law. No costs. 25.9.2020 To 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai D Bench 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Non Corporate Ward 1(4), Chennai-34. RS 5/6 http://www.judis.nic.in TCA.Nos.337-339 of 2020 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J RS TCA.Nos.337 to 339 of 2020 25.9.2020 6/6 http://www.judis.nic.in K. Prabhu v. Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Non Corporate Ward 1(4), Chennai
Report Error