9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1211X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t has filed affidavit of service dated 1-3-2013 stating that a set of appeal has been served upon the respondent on 1-3-2013 enclosing the acknowledgement of receipt. 2. In view of the said affidavit of service no further affidavit of service is required and the office report in this regard is incorrect. 3. After the appeal was admitted, notice was also issued to the respondent by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the authorization for the filing of the appeal was defective. 9. One of the substantial questions of law formulated in this appeal earlier is as under : - "(i) Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified to reject the appeal on the ground that the authorization for filing appeal suffers from the legal infirmity of not being dated by one member of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a different times or a different places. 11. In the present case, only ground on which the appeal has been rejected is that the authorization does not bears the date below the signatures of one of the members. 12. The authorization is on record and it is dated 28-6-2010 as is evident from the date mentioned below the signatures of one of the members of the committee. It also bears the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... defective authorization is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee holding that mere none mentioning of the date below the signatures of one of the members of the authorizing committee would not amount to any legal infirmity and the authorization would be a valid authorization so long as it is duly signed by the members.
16. The appeal is allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
