Limitation objections must be decided by appellate authorities; failure to do so justifies remand and fresh disposal.

A statutory appellate authority must decide a specifically raised limitation objection and record a clear finding accepting or rejecting it. Failure to adjudicate that plea amounts to a jurisdictional lapse and non-exercise of vested authority. Here, the Tribunal did not consider the assessee's objection that the revenue appeal was time-barred, so its order was found defective. The HC set aside the Tribunal's order and remitted the matter for fresh decision after considering the limitation issue and disposing of the appeal afresh.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was bound to record a finding on the assessee's plea that the revenue appeal was barred by limitation, and whether failure to do so warranted interference and remand.

Analysis: Once a plea of limitation is specifically raised before the appellate forum, it must decide that plea and record a finding either accepting or rejecting it. Non-consideration of such a plea amounts to failure to exercise jurisdiction vested by law. In the present matter, the Tribunal had not adjudicated the limitation objection raised by the assessee against the revenue appeal.

Conclusion: The omission was held to be an error affecting the validity of the Tribunal's order, and the matter was sent back for fresh decision after considering the plea of limitation.

Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded, the Tribunal's order was set aside, and the appeal was remitted for reconsideration of the limitation objection and disposal afresh.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory appellate authority must decide every duly raised limitation objection and record a finding thereon; failure to do so is a jurisdictional lapse justifying remand.

---