Natural justice in revision proceedings: denial of hearing vitiated the Commissioner's orders and they were quashed.

Orders passed in revision affecting civil rights are vitiated if the affected assessee is denied an opportunity of hearing. The Madras High Court noted that jurisdiction under article 227 is supervisory and not a substitute for revisional jurisdiction, so the petitions were treated as challenges under article 226. Because the Commissioner disposed of the revision petitions without granting the requested hearing to the assessee or counsel, the orders were quashed for breach of natural justice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Commissioner's orders under section 33A(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 were liable to be quashed for failure to afford the assessee an opportunity of hearing.

Analysis: The jurisdiction under article 227 of the Constitution is supervisory and is not a substitute for revisional jurisdiction. The petitions were therefore treated as petitions under article 226 to challenge the Commissioner's orders. Since it was not disputed that the Commissioner disposed of the revision petitions without giving the assessee or his counsel the requested hearing, the orders were vitiated. In revisional proceedings affecting civil rights, the authority acts in a quasi-judicial capacity and must give the affected party an opportunity to present his case.

Conclusion: The orders of the Commissioner were quashed for denial of hearing, and the petitions were allowed.

---