M/s. M.K.R.Palanisamy & Son, Salem V. ACIT, Coimbatore

MA 106/CHNY/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7137 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 14-10-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 14-10-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 21-05-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: G BASKAR
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI [BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER] M.P.NOS.101 TO 107/MDS/2010 [IN I.T.A NOS.1919 TO 1925/MDS/2009] ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2001-02 TO 2007-08 M/S MKR PALANISAMY & SONS 5/49 BAJANAI KOVIL STREET ELAMPILLAI SALEM DT. 637 502 VS THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE II COIMBATORE [PAN AAEFM 0745N] (PETITIONER) (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI G. BASKAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB, ADDL. CIT DATE OF HEARING : 14.10.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.10.2011 O R D E R PER HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THESE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SEEKING RECALL OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 12.3.201 0 PASSED EX-PARTE, IN I.T.A.NOS. 1919 TO 1925/MDS/2009, FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02 TO 2007-08. 2. THE ABOVE APPEALS WERE DISMISSED FOR NON-APPEARA NCE BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND FOR NON-FILING OF CONDONATION PETITION FOR THE DELAY OF ONE DAY OCCURRED IN FILIN G OF THE APPEAL. AS M.P 101 TO 107/10 :- 2 -: REGARDS THE DELAY OF ONE DAY, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBM ITTED THAT THE APPEAL PAPERS WERE SENT BY SPEED POST FROM SALEM ON 19.12.2009, AND IN NORMAL COURSE IT WOULD HAVE REACHED THE TRIB UNAL ON 21.12.2009, BUT UNFORTUNATELY IT HAD REACHED ONLY O N 22.12.2009. IN SUPPORT THEREOF, A PHOTOCOPY OF POSTAL RECEIPT IS P LACED ON RECORD. THE DELAY OF ONE DAY IN FILING THE APPEALS, WAS NEI THER WILLFUL NOR DELIBERATE BUT DUE TO REASON BEYOND HIS CONTROL. IN SO FAR AS NON- APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING IS CONCERNED, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT DUE TO ILLNESS OF HIS MOTHER WHO WAS HOSPITALIZED AT SALEM, HE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN SUPPORT OF THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED MEDIC AL CERTIFICATE AND AFFIDAVITS ALSO. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GOING THROUGH THE RECORDS AVAILABLE BEFORE US, WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE CAUSE FROM APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN VIEW OF THE REASONS MENTIONED IN THE PETITIONS, WE CONDONE THE DELAY OF ONE DAY, WHICH WAS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE ASS ESSEE, WE ADMIT THE APPEALS AND RECALL OUR ORDER IN QUESTION. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE APPEALS FOR HEARING ON 23.11.2011. BOTH THE PARTIES WERE INFORMED IN THE OPEN COURT, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO NEED TO ISSUE NOTICE OF HEARING SEPARATELY. M.P 101 TO 107/10 :- 3 -: 4. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE STAND ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 .10.2011 SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) VICE-PRESIDENT (HARI OM MARATHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 14 TH OCTOBER, 2011 RD : COPY TO: 1. PETITIONER 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR