Limitation-based rejection of a tax appeal may be set aside where communication of the original ex parte order is disputed and remand follows.

An appellate order rejecting a tax appeal solely on limitation may be set aside where service or communication of the underlying ex parte order is in dispute, because the assessee should not lose the statutory appellate remedy on a wrong appreciation of limitation. The matter is then remitted for fresh adjudication by the appellate authority, which must hear the parties and decide the appeal afresh in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether dismissal of the first appeal on limitation was sustainable and whether the matter required remand to the appellate authority for fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The writ court followed the earlier Division Bench view that where an appeal is rejected solely on limitation, and the underlying ex parte adjudication order was not duly communicated, the appellate order cannot stand. It also noticed that the petitioner should not lose the statutory appellate forum on a wrong appreciation of limitation and that fresh consideration should be given with opportunity of hearing.

Conclusion: The order dismissing the appeal was set aside and the matter was remitted to the appellate authority to decide afresh in accordance with law after giving the parties an opportunity of hearing.

Final Conclusion: The petitioner obtained remand of the appellate proceedings for fresh decision on the limitation issue and merits, and the writ petition succeeded to that extent only.

Ratio Decidendi: An appellate order rejecting a tax appeal solely on limitation, where communication of the original ex parte order is in dispute, may be set aside and remitted for fresh adjudication with due opportunity of hearing.

---