Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →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 orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) were jurisdiction and void because they were passed after the officer had compulsorily retired and in matters outside the territorial jurisdiction assigned to him.
Analysis: The order records that the Commissioner (Appeals) had ceased to hold office upon compulsory retirement and was therefore functus officio. It further records that certain appeals disposed of by him pertained to a jurisdiction not assigned to his office. Relying on the settled principle that jurisdictional defect goes to the root of the matter and that an order passed without jurisdiction is a nullity, the Tribunal held that the impugned appellate orders could not be sustained in law.
Conclusion: The impugned orders were held to be void for want of jurisdiction and not sustainable.
Final Conclusion: The matters were sent back to the respective jurisdictional Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing, and the connected appeals and cross objections were disposed of for statistical purposes.
Ratio Decidendi: An appellate order passed by an authority after it has become functus officio, or beyond the authority's assigned jurisdiction, is a jurisdictionally void nullity and must be set aside for decision by the competent forum.