N. RAJKUMAR Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE substantial question of law, among other things, which arises for consideration in these appeals is "whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in passing the impugned order in violation of the principles of natural justice by depriving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellants."

(2.) THOUGH very many questions, on the basis of the orders impugned in these appeals, have been raised, we are inclined to set aside the impugned orders solely with a view to give a fair opportunity to the appellants and therefore we are not going into the other substantial questions of law raised in these appeals.

(3.) ACCORDING to the appellants, the appeals were heard at length by a Bench in June 2008 and it was posted for filing of written submissions. Subsequently, written submissions were also filed, however, the appeals were posted for hearing in the month of October 2008 before some other Bench and orders were reserved. Thereafter, the appeals were posted once again for hearing on 5 -1 -2009. In such circumstance, the appellants made a representation dated 29 -12 -2008 to the Vice -President of the Tribunal at Chennai praying to transfer both the appeals to be heard by some other Bench of the Tribunal in any other city in the South. There was also a reminder dt. 25 -2 -2009 sent by the appellants. The appellants also made are presentation to the President of Tribunal at New Delhi on 25 -2 -2009 by making a reference to the earlier representations and sought for a direction to the Tribunal at Madras not to proceed with the appeals. The President of the Tribunal at Delhi, by way of an administrative instruction, stated to have passed an order dated 27th Feb., 2009 to the following effect: