https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63650 A missing signature on the annexed grounds of appeal was treated as a curable irregularity where the memo of appeal and verification were duly signed by the managing partner. Rule 45(2) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 was applied as directory in this context, so the omission did not go to the root of maintainability and could not justify dismissal without allowing rectification. The appeal was therefore required to be disposed of on merits rather than rejected for the signature defect. en-us Fri, 02 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Feb 2011 12:18:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63650 A missing signature on the annexed grounds of appeal was treated as a curable irregularity where the memo of appeal and verification were duly signed by the managing partner. Rule 45(2) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 was applied as directory in this context, so the omission did not go to the root of maintainability and could not justify dismissal without allowing rectification. The appeal was therefore required to be disposed of on merits rather than rejected for the signature defect. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 02 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63650