Bombay High Court: Dismissing a petition filed by a PSU, a bench comprising of Hon’ble Mohit S. Shah and Hon’ble M.S. Sanklecha, JJ ruled that a tribunal has no power to dismiss an appeal for non-appearance of appellant. The Court also ruled that a Miscellaneous Application for recall of an ex-parte dismissal order will fall under S. 254(2) & must be filed within 4 years from the date of the order. The Court observed that it was ‘a little strange’ that the Tribunal did not permit the practice of mentioning matters and requested the Tribunal to henceforth do away with such a practice and allow mentioning of matters as it was in its own interest. In the present case, the assessee’s appeal before the tribunal was dismissed for want of prosecution. The MA consequently filed was also rejected on the ground that it had been filed beyond a period of 4 years. The Court ruled that the tribunal does not have the power under Rule 24 to dismiss an appeal exparte and it has to deal with merits, however, as it was an error apparent on the face of record, the MA to recall the order will come under the purview of S. 254(2) which has a prescribed limitation period of 4 years hence the Tribunal was correct in dismissing the Miscellaneous Application. [Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited vs. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Writ Petition No. 1740 of 2013, decided on 23rd October, 2013]
Posted on: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 11:37:44 +0000