ANIL KUMAR AGRAHARI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Sumit Nema, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Sanjay Lal, learned Counsel for the Revenue.

(2.) THE present appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is admitted on the following substantial question of law:

(3.) LEARNED Counsel has commenced us to the decisions rendered in Rajendra Prasad Borah v. ITAT : [2008] 302 ITR 243 (Gauhati). Be it noted, the learned single judge in the said case has referred to the decision rendered in CIT v. S. Chenniappa Mudaliar : [1969] 74 ITR 41 (SC) and Rule 24 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, and expressed the view that the Tribunal could not have dismissed the appeal without adverting to the merits. It is worth noting that the similar view has been expressed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Rajasthan in Tribhuwan Kumar v. CIT : [2007] 294 ITR 401 (Raj).