1983 (11) TMI 109 - AT - Wealth-tax

Tribunal grants appeal for tax assessment, stresses assessee rights

MM Gandhy. Versus Ninth Wealth-Tax Officer.

MM Gandhy. Versus Ninth Wealth-Tax Officer. - ITD 007, 450, Issues:1. Competency of appeal before the AAC due to non-compliance with filing rules.2. Dismissal of appeal by AAC without considering the merits.3. Assessment under section 16(1) and appealability of the assessment.4. Failure to provide assessment order to the assessee.5. Request for rectification of mistake under section 35 of the Wealth-tax Act.Analysis:1. The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the AAC, challenging the demand of wealth-tax raised by the WTO. The AAC dismissed the appeal citing non-compliance with filing rules as the memorandum of appeal was not accompanied by a copy of the assessment order, which the assessee claimed to have never received. The department argued that the appeal was rightfully dismissed due to non-compliance with Income-tax Rules, 1962.2. The assessee contended that the AAC erred in dismissing the appeal summarily without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. The representative for the assessee argued that the assessment made by the WTO was not under section 16(1) as claimed by the assessee, but rather under section 16(3) or 16(5), making it appealable. The failure to enclose the assessment order was due to the assessee not receiving it, which should have been taken into account by the AAC.3. The Tribunal analyzed the assessment process and concluded that the assessment was not made under section 16(1) as claimed by the assessee. The discrepancy between the demand raised by the WTO and the amount admitted by the assessee indicated that the assessment fell under section 16(3) or 16(5), making it appealable. The Tribunal emphasized that the rules regarding filing procedures should not override the statutory right of appeal granted to the assessee under the Wealth-tax Act.4. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had requested the WTO to rectify the mistake and issue a proper assessment order, but no action was taken. The failure to provide the assessment order to the assessee should have been considered a valid reason for not enclosing it with the appeal memorandum. The Tribunal held that justice required vacating the AAC's order and directing the WTO to pass an appropriate assessment order after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity to be heard.5. Ultimately, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of ensuring that the assessee's rights are upheld and that justice is served in tax assessment matters.