9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (2) TMI 185X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r each of Appeal Nos. 183 to 194 of 1982. Before we proceed further, we would like to clarify the appeals bearing WT Appeal Nos. 183 to 188 of 1982 relate to the orders purported to have been made by the WTO under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ('the Act') and rest of the appeals relate to the orders purported to have been made by the WTO under section 18(1)(b). All these 12 appeals, thus, relate to the assessment years 1969-70 to 1974-75 only. In the first bunch of appeals there is a covering letter dated 12-6-1982, where the WTO, Balaghat, M.P., himself states that he is submitting the following documents: (i) Appeal petition with grounds of appeal in triplicate: (ii) Certified copy of the Commissioner's order under sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he WTO that two copies of the order of the WTO for each of the assessment year had also not been filed. 3. The above defects, however, were not removed. These appeals, therefore, were fixed for hearing on 15-12-1983 and for this purpose on 5-12-1983 a letter was sent to the WTO, Balaghat for serving the notice of hearing on the respondent and in this letter it was also pointed out that the defects pointed out in the memo dated 23-8-1982, copy of which was enclosed, had not been rectified and these should be rectified immediately. Again on 24-1-1984, a letter was written to the WTO, Balaghat, pointing out that the appeals have been fixed for hearing on 22-2-1984 and in this letter also it was pointed out that the defects pointed out in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the documents referred to in sub-rule (1) of rule 9 supra. The factual narration given above shows that when the appeals were presented on 12-6-1982 at the residence of the Assistant Registrar on a holiday, these were accepted. All the appeals, as clearly described above, did not have any of the documents required under rule 9 except the memo of appeal and the order of the Commissioner, Jabalpur (M.P.) under section 24(2). Therefore, the manner of handling all these appeals by the revenue shows apathetic attitude as no effort had been made to remove the defects which were pointed out to the revenue, as early as in August 1982. All these appeals are apparently incompetent and defective. More than sufficient time for removing the defects had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
