PER Dr.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT This is a bunch of nine appeals. All the appeals are directed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income- tax(Appeals)-I at Chennai, all dated 17-10-2012. The appeals arise out of the assessments completed under section 143(3), read with section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appeal filed by Shri M.Bhawarlal for the assessment year 2007-08 arises out of the regular assessment completed under section 143(3) of the Act.
2. In the case of Shri B.Kishore Kumar, all the first appeals have been disposed of by the Commissioner of Income- tax(Appeals) through his common order dated 17-10-2012. Likewise, in the case of Shri M.Bhawarlal, the first appeals have been disposed of by a common order of even date.
3. The Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) has dismissed all the appeals in limine for the reason that the assessees did not appear before him or caused to appear before him, inspite of several opportunities given by him. It is the case - - ITA 2230 to 2238 of 2012 3 of the assessees that the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) has dismissed all the appeals without going into the merits of the cases and as such the impugned dismissal orders are not sustainable in law.
4. We heard Shri B.Ramakrishnan, the learned chartered accountant appearing for the assessees and Shri N.Madhavan, the learned Joint Commissioner of Income-tax appearing for the Revenue.
5. We have no doubt that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) has given umpteen number of opportunities for the assessees to appear before him and present their cases. Atleast ten notices were issued to the parties, as seen from the records of the case. But, inspite of all these efforts from the office of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals), for reasons best known to them, the assessees did not appear before him. It is in these provocative circumstances that the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) was constrained to dismiss the appeals in limine for want of prosecution.
6. But, the fact is that the Commissioner of Income- tax(Appeals) has dismissed all appeals in limine on the technical - - ITA 2230 to 2238 of 2012 4 ground of non prosecution of the appeals. He has not considered the merits of the case, in the light of the grounds raised by the assessees in all these appeals. It is a settled law that even if appeals are decided ex parte, the appeals must be disposed off after considering the grounds raised by the assessees and that too through a speaking order. An appeal cannot be rejected as such for the reason that there was no appearance. Unless the assessee withdraws the appeal or does not press the appeal, it is the bounden duty of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals), who is a public authority, to suo motu examine the merits of the case as reflected in the grounds of appeal. A public authority is always expected to perform his duties judiciously and in the interests of justice. In such circumstances, even though the disposal of the appeals ex parte is justified, the non appearance of the assessees as such, is not sufficient to reject the appeals in limine.
7. Therefore, all these orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) are set aside. The files are remitted back to the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) with a direction to reinstate all these appeals on his rolls and dispose them off on - - ITA 2230 to 2238 of 2012 5 their merits, after giving the assessees opportunities of being heard.
8. In result, all these appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Orders pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing on Monday, the 11th of March, 2013 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (Vikas Awasthy) (Dr. O.K.Narayanan) Judicial Member Vice-President Chennai, Dated, the 11th March, 2013.
V.A.P. Copy to: 1. Appellants
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(A)
5. DR
6. GF.