9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (4) TMI 110X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent year 1963-64, the Commissioner took only one ground of appeal, pertaining to the direction of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) to the WTO that he should allow income-tax liabilities of the assessee which he had originally disallowed. In respect of the assessment years 1964-65 to 1972-73, the Commissioner raised two grounds of appeal, one of which was as above, and the other was with regard to the direction of the Commissioner (Appeals) to allow deduction under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ('the Act'), in respect of the house property occupied by the assessee. In respect of the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75, one more question, apart from the aforesaid two questions, was raised by the Commissioner regarding the di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons, received by the Appellate Tribunal on 1-3-1982. It was pointed out by the learned departmental representative, inter alia, as follows: "The assessment years involved are as many as twelve. The scrutiny report of the appellate orders were put up before the Commissioner of Income-tax, WB. XI, on 17-2-1981. Since the CIT(A) followed the order of the Tribunal in W.T.A. No. 2/8/1969-70 for the assessment years 1964-65 in the case of Shri Shiva Prasad Bagaria, it was necessary to go through that order. The above order would not be traced by the ITO, P-Ward, Dist. 1(1), The CIT, W. B. XI, therefore, authorised filing of appeal to save limitation with the following observation: 'We may file the appeal as proposed. In the meantime we may ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed in a consolidated manner before the Tribunal within the time prescribed. A person cannot, therefore, file a truncated appeal by raising one or two grounds of appeal only to meet the time limit prescribed and then take its own time for rummaging through his record and formulating additional grounds of appeal, totally unconnected with the subject-matter of the original grounds of appeal. Even rule 11 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules did not justify taking this view of the procedure for filing appeals before the Tribunal. 6. In rejoinder, the learned departmental representative said that rule 11 was very flexible and it ought to be interpreted liberally and that the appellant should not be denied the opportunity of raising additional grou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ling an appeal would be frustrated, if the aforesaid procedure of filing appeals in a piecemeal fashion is permitted. An appellate order becomes final if not appealed against and this finality of an order is an important legal right which gets vested in the respondent after the lapse of the period of limitation for filing an appeal. This important vested right of a respondent should not be destabilised by a court, unless the appellant is able to show that there was some compelling reason which prevented the appellant from raising these issues, sought to be raised through additional grounds, through the original memos of appeal. 8. The cases relied on by the learned departmental representative do not at all advance the revenue's case. In t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dividend and another of Rs. 71,800 standing under the head provision for taxation may also be considered as part of the capital employed in its business under said rule 1 of the Second Schedule. The Tribunal granted permission to raise the said issues. This was challenged before the Punjab and Haryana High Court through reference by the revenue. The Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the action of the Tribunal and pointed out that an additional ground could be raised for the first time before the Tribunal in view of rule 11 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. As will be seen from the facts stated above, the additional question, which the assessee was seeking the permission of the Tribunal to raise, pertained to the origin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 04 represented the intangible addition made to the assessee's income not only in the present year but also in the earlier assessment year and that, therefore, the impugned addition was not justified. The raising of the additional plea was resisted by the revenue but the High Court turned it down by saying that the Tribunal could allow the new plea to be raised under the power to be spelt out from rule 11 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules. It would be seen from the aforesaid facts that in this case also, the additional ground of contention raised pertained to the subject-matter of the original ground of appeal. An altogether fresh and new subject-matter was not permitted to be raised through the additional ground of appeal. Similar was the pos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
