9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1278X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raised with respect to the maintainability of the appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal, on the very same grounds as raised in the Review Petition, the Tribunal refused to consider the same since the High Court had already directed consideration on merits. It is unfortunate that the Revenue did not place the order of the learned Single Judge in the Review Petition passed six years prior, before the Tribunal. The learned Senior Counsel, Government of India (Taxes) would submit that since the CIT (Appeals) at the second instance had acted without jurisdiction, the order is non est in law. No reason to hold so in an appeal since the Revenue has not raised such contentions before the first appellate authority or before the Tribunal nor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere initiated. The respondent was also proceeded against for reason of he being a partner of the firm. The respondent asserted that he was not a partner and to stall the recovery proceedings, the respondent approached this Court with W.P.(C) No.13544 of 2005 on 18.04.2005. Despite that contention, the respondent also filed an appeal from the assessment order, as seen from the memorandum produced at Annexure-D, on 28.05.2005. The writ petition was disposed of by Annexure-H order dated 23.08.2005, which directed the CIT (Appeals) to peruse the records, hear the writ petitioner and the concerned Assessing Officer [AO] and dispose of the appeal within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. There was also a stay granted ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her the appeal was maintainable before the first appellate authority. The Tribunal considered the appeal filed by the Revenue, by Annexure-J order dated 06.01.2012. 5. As noticed from Annexure-J, the date of hearing was 03.01.2012. We see from the order of the Tribunal that though an objection was raised with respect to the maintainability of the appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal, on the very same grounds as raised in the Review Petition, the Tribunal refused to consider the same since the High Court had already directed consideration on merits. It is unfortunate that the Revenue did not place the order of the learned Single Judge in the Review Petition passed six years prior, before the Tribunal. The learned Senior Counsel, Gove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
