Shri R.Duraisamy, Cuddalore V. ITO, Cuddalore

MA 105/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6524 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 01-07-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 23-06-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K E B RENGARAJAN JUNIOR
• Assessee Lawyers: V SRINIVASAN
• Keywords: Value adopted by valuation officer

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH C CHENNAI (BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) .. M.P. NO. 105/MDS/2011 (IN I.T.A. NO. 976/MDS/2007) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2002-03 SHRI R. DURAISAMY, NO.119, VOC STREET, PANRUTI, CUDDALORE DISTRICT. PAN : AAAHR4668F (PETITIONER) V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I(4), CUDDALORE. (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI V. SRINIVASAN RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.E.B . RENGARAJAN, JUNIOR STANDING COUNSEL O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : IN THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION ASSESSEE PLEADS FOR A RECALL OF ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN I.T.A. NO. 976/MDS/2007 DATED 25 TH AUGUST, 2008, CITING A REASON THAT HE COULD NOT ENTER APPEARANCE AT THE TIME OF HEARIN G OF THE APPEAL DUE TO FACTORS BEYOND HIS CONTROL. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE CONTENSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL S. THE TRIBUNAL HAD IN ITS ORDER DATED 25 TH AUGUST, 2008, DECIDED THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVE NUE ON MERITS THOUGH THERE WAS FAILURE OF ASSESSEE TO ENTE R APPEARANCE. THE TRIBUNAL HAD ONLY REMITTED THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) FOR CONSIDERATION M.P. NO. 105/MDS/11 2 AFRESH WHILE HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER COU LD MAKE REFERENCE TO VALUATION OFFICER UNDER SECTION 142A OF I.T.ACT. 3. THOUGH RULES 24 & 25 OF APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULE S, 1963 DO PROVIDE FOR A RECALL WHEN THERE WAS NON APPEARANCE OF PARTIES BEF ORE TRIBUNAL, WHEN AN ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED ON MERITS AND MATTER IS ONLY REMIT TED BACK TO CIT(APPEALS), WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT A RECALL OF THE ORDER IS NO T NECESSARY. ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO CITE OR SHOW ANY MISTAKE OR ERROR IN T HE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. WE THUS FIND NO MERITS IN THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON THE FIRST DAY OF JULY, 2011. SD/- SD/- (HARI OM MARATHA) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 1 ST JULY, 2011. KRI. COPY TO: (1) PETITIONER (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT(A) (4) CIT (5) D.R. (6) GUARD FILE