Appeal treated as received where office acknowledgment existed; missing record to be reconstructed and matter decided on merits.

An appeal bearing the Commissioner (Appeals) office acknowledgment and an authorised verification was to be treated as duly received, especially where a copy had also been sent to the departmental office. A bare intimation that the appeal was not registered, without checking the relevant office record, was an incorrect approach. If the record was not traceable, the proper course was to reconstruct the file and decide the matter on merits after giving the assessee an effective opportunity. The matter was therefore required to be treated as received and reheard afresh in accordance with natural justice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee's appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was to be treated as duly filed and, if the record was not traceable, whether the matter should be reconstructed and decided on merits.

Analysis: The appeal papers bore acknowledgment of the office of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the verification and appeal memorandum were signed by the authorised signatory. The record also showed that a copy had been forwarded to the departmental office, yet no effective verification was undertaken before declining to hear the matter. A mere intimation that the appeal was not registered, without checking the relevant office records, was held to be an incorrect approach. The appropriate course was to treat the appeal as received, require reconstruction if necessary, and decide the matter after giving proper opportunity.

Conclusion: The appeal was directed to be treated as received, the Commissioner (Appeals) was to reconstruct the record if required, and the matter was to be decided afresh on merits in accordance with natural justice.

---