1991 (8) TMI 150 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether an appeal lies in a case where continuation of registration has been refused due to a delay in filing Form No. 12.
2. Whether the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not entertaining additional grounds and considering evidence submitted on the date of appeal.

Analysis:
1. The case involved an appeal where the assessee, a firm, had been denied continuation of registration due to a delay in filing Form No. 12. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) completed the assessment under section 143(1) and categorized the assessee as an unregistered firm. The Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal, citing that the case did not fall under any clauses of section 246(1) of the IT Act. However, conflicting decisions from different High Courts raised the question of appealability in such cases. The Tribunal referred to judgments from the Orissa High Court and the Allahabad High Court, favoring the view that an appeal lies when registration is denied due to a delay in filing the required form. The Tribunal held that the assessee should have the opportunity to explain the delay and, if necessary, appeal the decision.

2. The Tribunal found that the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not considering additional grounds and evidence submitted by the assessee during the appeal. It noted discrepancies in the assessment process, indicating a lack of proper examination and notice to the assessee. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of providing the assessee with a fair opportunity to present their case and evidence. Therefore, it set aside the Deputy Commissioner's order and directed a reevaluation of the appeal, allowing the assessee to explain their position and submit any relevant evidence. The Tribunal instructed the Deputy Commissioner to consider any new evidence and objections raised by the Income Tax Officer before making a decision based on merit and in accordance with the law.