2019 (8) TMI 1274 - HC - Income Tax

Power of Tribunal u/s 254 to dismiss the appeal in limine - non prosecution - non appearance of appellant - HELD THAT - The correctness of the decision of the Tribunal in dismissing the appeals for non prosecution is no longer res integra and has been decided in several cases by this Court following the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. S.Chenniappa Mudaliar 1969 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT . Hence the Tribunal erred in dismissing the appeal only on the ground of non prosecution without adverting to the merits of the matter. In the light of the above the order impugned in this appeal has to be necessarily set aside and the substantial questions of law are to be answered in favour of the assessee. - the impugned common order are set aside and the appeals are restored to the file of the Tribunal for a decision on merits. - Decided in favour of the assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Appeals filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against common order dated 15.3.2017 for assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14. Substantial questions of law raised regarding the dismissal of the appeal without going into merits and the exercise of power under Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals due to the absence of the assessee's representative, citing precedents like CIT Vs. Multiplan India P. Ltd. and late Tukojirao Holker Vs. Wealth Tax Commissioner. The assessee later filed petitions explaining the absence, but these were dismissed as time-barred. The High Court noted that similar issues had been addressed in previous cases, such as M/s.3M Electro and Communication India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. JCIT, Pondicherry, where the Tribunal's dismissal for non-prosecution was deemed improper based on legal precedents. The High Court emphasized the importance of hearing appeals on merits and not dismissing them without proper consideration.

Other relevant decisions were cited, including N.S.Mohan Vs. ITAT, Chennai, Smt. Ritha Sabapathy Vs. DCIT, and Sanket Estate & Finance (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT. These cases highlighted the necessity of adjudicating appeals on their merits, even if one party is absent. The High Court referenced the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, emphasizing that appeals should not be dismissed without considering the merits. The decision of Tribhuvan Kumar Vs. CIT by the Rajasthan High Court further supported the need for proper adjudication based on legal principles.

In conclusion, the High Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the previous orders and restoring them to the Tribunal for a decision on merits. The substantial questions of law were answered in favor of the assessee, emphasizing the importance of due process and consideration of all relevant factors in tax appeals. No costs were awarded, and the connected CMP was closed.