Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Tribunal could entertain a claim under section 80J that was not decided by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and whether such a claim could form part of the subject-matter of the appeal.
Analysis: The jurisdiction of the Tribunal is confined to the subject-matter of the appeal, and that subject-matter is determined by the express or implied decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Within that jurisdiction, however, the Tribunal has wide powers to permit new legal grounds in support of the same claim for relief, provided the opposite side is given an opportunity of hearing. A claim not raised before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner cannot be treated as forming the subject-matter of the appeal unless the factual basis for that grievance is first established. On the facts placed before the court, the Tribunal ought first to have determined whether the section 80J contention had in fact been urged before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.
Conclusion: The court declined to answer the referred question and left it open to the Tribunal to determine the preliminary factual issue and then dispose of the appeal accordingly.
Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal may entertain new legal grounds only within the limits of the subject-matter of the appeal, which is confined to the decision actually made by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, express or implied.