M/s Sunshine Foods, Ludhiana V. Addl. CIT, Ludhiana

MA 106/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5686 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-07-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 11-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SUBHASH AGGARWAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NO.106/CHD/2016 IN ITA NO.460/CHD/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) M/S SUNSHINE FOODS, VS. THE ADDL. CIT, LUDHIANA. RANGE-VI, LUDHIANA. PAN: AAJHS5329F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI SUBHASH AGGARWAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K. MITTAL, DR DATE OF HEARING : 23.06.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.07.2017 O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M . : THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE APPLICANT FOR RECALLING OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNA L DATED 15.09.2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, WHICH WAS DISMISSED EX-PARTE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 2. THE REASON FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING GIVEN IN THE APPLICATION IS THAT NO NOTICE OF THE OF HEARING WAS EVER SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE WAS PRE SENT IN THE TRIBUNAL ON 14.9.2016 AND APPEARED IN THE CASE OF C.L.JAIN WOOLLEN MILLS PVT. LTD. VS. DCIT IN ITA NO.461/CHD/2016 BUT IT WAS NOT KNOWN WHEN THE PRESE NT APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR. HOWEVER, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE OWNS THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR NON-APPEARANCE AND PLEADS FOR RECALLING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 2 3. THE LD. DR DID NOT CONTROVERT THE SAME. 4. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ENTIRE FACTS OF THE CASE FOR OUR CONSIDERATION. WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT REASON FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE APPOINTED DAT E OF HEARING TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL. WE ARE THEREFORE O F THE OPINION THAT TO MEET THE ENDS OF NATURAL JUSTICE, T HE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY O F BEING HEARD. EXERCISING THE POWER OF THE TRIBUNAL PROVIDED IN THE PROVISO TO RULES 24 AND 25 OF THE I TAT RULES 1963, TO SET ASIDE AN EX-PARTE ORDER AND RES TORE THE APPEAL IN CASE WHERE AN ASSESSEE DEMONSTRATES REASO NABLE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE, AND CONSIDERING THE ENTIR ETY OF FACTS IN THE PRESENT CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS IS A FIT CASE FOR RECALLING THE ORDER FOR FRESH HEARING, WHICH WE HEREBY DO. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE CAS E FOR FRESH HEARING IN DUE COURSE AND ISSUE FORMAL NOTICE OF THE SAME TO BOTH THE PARTIES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FI LED BY THE APPLICANT IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (SANJAY GARG) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 5 TH JULY, 2017 *RATI* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH