1979 (3) TMI 9 - HC - Income Tax

Delay In Filing Writ, Income Tax, Mistake Apparent From Record, Natural Justice, Writ Petition

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against the judgment of the Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.
2. Application for rectification under Section 36 of the Act.
3. Allegation of violation of principles of natural justice in the disposal of the appeal.
4. Delay in filing the writ petition.

Analysis:
The judgment of the High Court of Kerala involved an appeal against the decision of the Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The appellant's writ petition sought to quash certain orders of the Tribunal and requested a rehearing of the appeals. The Tribunal had dismissed the appeals concerning the assessment of agricultural income for the appellant and his wife's estate. The appellant filed an application for rectification under Section 36 of the Act, citing the need for a fresh report from the Commission and an opportunity to argue the appeal on its merits. The Tribunal rejected the application, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition by the learned judge.

The primary issue revolved around the interpretation of Section 36 of the Act concerning rectification of mistakes in orders. The appellant contended that there was a mistake in not allowing a full opportunity to argue the appeal on its merits. The Tribunal maintained that the rectification provision did not apply in this case as it was not a mistake apparent from the record. The High Court analyzed relevant legal precedents, including the Supreme Court's decision in ITO v. Asok Textiles Ltd., to determine the scope of rectification under similar provisions.

Furthermore, the High Court addressed the allegation of a violation of natural justice in the disposal of the appeal. It was observed that the counsel was left with the impression of receiving another opportunity to argue the appeal on its merits. This impression, confirmed by the counsel's affidavit and accepted by the learned judge, indicated a lack of fair opportunity for a full and fair hearing. Consequently, the High Court concluded that there had been a breach of natural justice, warranting the quashing of the Tribunal's order and a remittal of the appeal for fresh consideration.

Lastly, the High Court considered the issue of delay in filing the writ petition. Despite the delay between the communication of the Tribunal's order and the filing of the petition, the appellant had been actively pursuing rectification during that period. The Court deemed it unjust to penalize the appellant for this delay and, therefore, allowed the appeal, quashed the Tribunal's order, and directed a fresh consideration of the appeals in accordance with the law and observations made in the judgment.