LAWS(PAT)-1956-3-9

GOPIRAM BHAGWANDAS Vs. COMMR OF INCOME TAX

Decided On March 22, 1956
GOPIRAM BHAGWANDAS Appellant
V/S
COMMR.OF INCOME-TAX Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application on behalf of the petitioner under Section 66, Sub-section (3), income-tax Act praying for a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Branch, to treat his application under Section 66(1) of the Act as having been made within time. The circumstances which have given rise to this application are as follows. An appeal by the petitioner-assessee was heard by the Tribunal on 25-3-1955, and orders thereon were passed on 31-3-1955. A copy of this order was sent to the assessee's lawyer, Mr. V.D. Narayan, and received by him on 7-4-1955. For some reason or other, the copy of this order was not despatched to the assessee who ultimately received it on 22-6-1955. An application under Section 66(1) of the Act was then filed before the Tribunal on 12-7-1955, but the application was dismissed on the ground that it was barred by time,

(2.) It has been contended by Mr. S.N. Datta, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, that, in view of the law provided in the various sections of the Act and the rules framed thereunder, the application was within time and the Tribunal wrongly decided the same to be barred. This submission appears to have considerable merit. Section 33 relates to appeals against orders of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner before the Appellate Tribunal. Sub-section (3) of this section provides that an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal shall be in the prescribed form. That form may be found in the Income-tax Manual, and a column of it requires a statement about the address to which notices may be sent to the appellant. The assessee filed up this column in the following manner: "M/S Gopiram Bhagwandas, Post Office Dhanbad, district Manbhum". It is clear from this statement that the assessee wanted all notices in connection with the appeal to be sent to him and not to his lawyer or agent. In Basant Lal Ramjidas v. Commr. of Income-tay, Bihar and Orissa, ILR 11 Pat 40 : (AIR 1932 Pat 103) (A) an application was made by an agent of an aasessee without express authorisation, in writing signed by the assessee himself, and it was held that it was not an application at all so as to entitle the assessee to a deduction of time on the basis of that application. The observations which were made in this connection by their Lordships are important. They said: --

(3.) It is, therefore, necessary to find out if the lawyer on whom the notice of the copy of the order was served had expressly been authorised to receive it by his vakalatnama. It is clear that he was not so authorised by the particulars given on the memorandum as required by law in which the assessee had submitted that all notices should be sent to him by his address at Dhandbad, District Manbhum. A certified copy of the power given to that lawyer has been marked Annexure C. The relevant portion of the document may be stated as follows: