COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. KARIM KAMRUDDIN MALIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Parchure with Shri Mohta, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Jaiswal, learned Senior Advocate with Mrs. Bajaj, learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) The present Appeal has been admitted on 10.01.2018 and was directed to be placed for hearing on 28.02.2018. The question formulated by this Court then reads :

(3.) Shri Parchure, learned counsel, however, has pointed out very limited question of law on which appeal has been admitted. He submits that if this question is answered in favour of the revenue, larger exercise attempted by Shri Jaiswal, learned Senior Advocate, will not be open at all. He further adds that in any case the authorities ought to have looked into and recorded a finding of prejudice and thereafter only proceeded to look into the law on the point. He is relying upon Rule 27 and submits that I.T.A.T. is taking recourse to said Rule to permit the respondents before it to support the order appealed against, though he may not have challenged the adverse findings recorded therein. According to him, without giving revenue, which was not appellant before the I.T.A.T., necessary opportunity in this respect, such a course of action is not available.