2019 (7) TMI 300 - HC - Income Tax

Dismissal of appeal on account of non-service of notice to assessee - treatment to payment made by the assessee in respect of obtaining information on distribution of net work - revenue or capital expenditure - HELD THAT - When the case was heard by the Division Bench on 03.01.2013, an order was passed giving four weeks time to the appellant/revenue to comply with the defects stated by the Registry, i.e., the non-service of notice on the respondent, failing which, the tax case appeal stands dismissed automatically without further reference to this Court. Till date, the respondent has not been served. In the light of the order dated 03.01.2013, we have no option except to dismiss the appeal for non-service of notice to the respondent. In the light of the order dated 03.01.2013, we grant liberty to the appellant/Revenue to restore this appeal by filing a restoration petition after obtaining correct address of the respondent and if such petition is filed, the Registry is directed to number the restoration petition without insisting upon the condone delay petition.

Summary

Issues:
Admissibility of tax case appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a tax case appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The substantial question of law in this case revolved around the nature of a payment made by the assessee amounting to ?19.47 crores for obtaining information on the distribution of network for the assessment year 1998-99. The appellant/revenue was represented by Mr. T.R. Senthil Kumar and Mrs. K.G. Usha Rani. The respondent/assessee was not served with the notice, leading to a directive by the Division Bench to rectify this issue within a specified timeframe. Failure to comply with this directive would result in the automatic dismissal of the appeal without further reference to the Court. Despite subsequent listings of the case, the respondent was not served, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeal due to non-service of notice. However, the appellant/Revenue was granted the liberty to restore the appeal by filing a restoration petition after obtaining the correct address of the respondent. If such a petition is filed, the Registry was directed to number the restoration petition without requiring a condone delay petition. Consequently, the tax case appeal was dismissed with no costs incurred.