1983 (1) TMI 148 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues: Lack of jurisdiction by the learned AAC in dismissing the appeal, proper course of action by the learned AAC, interpretation of statutory Form No. 7 advice by the ITO, application of legal precedents on jurisdiction, setting aside the impugned order and restoring the appeal to the proper appellate authority.

In the judgment delivered by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jabalpur, the issue at hand revolves around the lack of jurisdiction by the learned AAC in dismissing the appeal. The impugned order of the learned AAC, Gwalior Range, Gwalior, was based on the premise that the jurisdiction over the appeal lies with the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Indore, due to the assessed income for the relevant assessment year. However, the Tribunal noted that the learned AAC lacked jurisdiction over the appeal, rendering the order a nullity and void ab initio. The Tribunal emphasized that the proper course of action for the learned AAC would have been to either return the appeal to the assessee or forward it to the authority with proper jurisdiction, in this case, the Commissioner (Appeals), Indore.

Furthermore, the interpretation of statutory Form No. 7 advice by the ITO played a crucial role in the analysis. The Form advised the assessee to file the appeal before the AAC of Income-tax, Gwalior Range, Gwalior. The Tribunal highlighted that the filing of the appeal was based on the ITO's advice, making the dismissal of the appeal by the learned AAC unjustified. Legal precedents were cited to support the argument, emphasizing that a judgment given without jurisdiction is non est and should be set aside rather than dismissed.

Based on the above analysis, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the appeal to the proper appellate authority, the Commissioner (Appeals), Indore. The Tribunal deemed the appeal to have been filed in time, condoning any delay, as the assessee had acted in good faith and on the advice of the ITO. The Commissioner (Appeals) was directed to decide the appeal on its merits, providing a reasonable opportunity for both the assessee and the ITO to present their case. Ultimately, the appeal by the assessee succeeded, and the decision was in favor of the appellant.