Tribunal order validity: separate concurring signed judgments by members constitute a valid Tribunal order under procedural rules.

The High Court held that separate, concurrently expressed, signed and dated judgments by each Member of a two Member Appellate Tribunal satisfy the requirement that an order be in writing and signed, and therefore constitute an order of the Tribunal under section 33(4) and rule 33(1). The Court treated the formal requirement for a single consolidated order as directory rather than mandatory where Members have collaborated, pooled their minds and reached the same conclusion, so absence of a single formal order is an irregularity of form and not a nullity, favouring the revenue.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in the circumstances of the case, there was an order of the Appellate Tribunal as contemplated by section 33(4) of the Income-tax Act read with rule 33(1) of the rules framed thereunder.

Analysis: The Tribunal consisted of two Members who heard the connected appeals, each Member prepared, signed and dated a judgment dismissing the appeals; there were concurrent conclusions though separate opinions were recorded. Section 33(4) contemplates that the Appellate Tribunal may pass such orders as it thinks fit and communicate them; rule 33(1) requires that the order of the Bench be in writing and signed and dated by the Members constituting it. The Court held that a Tribunal can speak only through its Members and that there is no prohibition in section 33 or rules 2 and 33 against Members delivering separate but concurring judgments. Even if a single formal order purporting to be on behalf of the Tribunal had been necessary, its absence would amount to an irregularity of form and not to invalidity where the Members have collaborated, pooled their minds and reached the same conclusion. The provisions were therefore treated as directory rather than mandatory in the circumstances where the substance of adjudication by the Members is present.

Conclusion: The question is answered in the affirmative in favour of the department and against the assessee; the separate, though concurring, signed and dated judgments of the Members constitute an order of the Tribunal for the purposes of section 33(4) and rule 33(1).

---