Curable defects in appeal authorisation cannot justify rejection without giving the appellant a fair chance to rectify them.

Dismissal of tax appeals for curable defects in the appeal memorandum and signatory authority was held unsustainable where the appellant had not been clearly told to rectify the defect before rejection. The appellate forum noted that the absence of proper authorisation was capable of cure and that denial of consideration on merits was unjustified without a fair opportunity to correct it. The appeals were therefore remanded for fresh consideration after allowing time to file proper authorisation and granting an opportunity of hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the dismissal of the appeals by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground of defects in the appeal memorandum and signatory was justified, or whether the matter should be reconsidered after allowing the appellant an opportunity to cure the defects.

Analysis: The defect noted by the appellate authority related to the capacity in which the appeal memorandum was signed and the absence of proper authorisation. The order records that such defects were curable and that they had not been specifically intimated to the appellant when personal hearing was granted. In these circumstances, the denial of consideration on merits was found unsustainable. The appropriate course was to permit the appellant time to file proper authorisation and to hear the matter afresh.

Conclusion: The dismissal on technical grounds was set aside and the appeals were remanded for reconsideration after granting an opportunity of hearing and time to cure the defects.

Ratio Decidendi: A dismissal of an appeal for curable defects in signing or authorisation should not stand where the defect can be rectified and the appellant is not afforded a proper opportunity to do so before rejection.

---