Income-tax appellate procedure cannot permit dismissal for default when the statute requires merits-based adjudication after hearing both sides.

Rule 24 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1946, could not authorise dismissal of an income-tax appeal for default of appearance because section 33(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 required the Tribunal to decide the appeal after hearing both parties. A dismissal for non-appearance was treated as a termination for non-prosecution, not an adjudication on the merits, and was inconsistent with the statutory scheme governing final appellate orders and references on questions of law. The rule was therefore held ultra vires to the extent that it permitted dismissal for default, and the Tribunal was required to dispose of appeals on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether rule 24 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1946, so far as it empowered the Tribunal to dismiss an appeal for default of appearance, was ultra vires the Income-tax Act, 1922.

Analysis: The Appellate Tribunal was held to be a statutory quasi-judicial body whose procedure could be regulated only consistently with the Act. Rule 24, in authorising dismissal for non-appearance, was contrasted with section 33(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, which required the Tribunal to pass orders on the appeal after giving both parties an opportunity of being heard. A dismissal for default was treated as a termination for non-prosecution and not an adjudication on the subject-matter in controversy, unlike an ex parte decision on merits. The scheme of sections 66 and 66A, which contemplated a final appellate order giving rise to questions of law for reference, was held to be inconsistent with a procedure that allowed the Tribunal to avoid deciding the appeal on merits. The earlier view upholding the rule was disapproved.

Conclusion: Rule 24, in so far as it enabled dismissal of an appeal for default of appearance, was held to be ultra vires section 33(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1922.

Final Conclusion: The Tribunal was required to dispose of income-tax appeals on merits, and a procedural rule permitting dismissal for default could not stand against the statutory mandate.

Ratio Decidendi: A rule framed to regulate Tribunal procedure cannot authorise dismissal for default where the governing statute requires the appeal to be decided on its merits after hearing the parties.

---