Rishi Goyal, New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

MA 11/DEL/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2779 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 15-09-2022
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 09-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SANDEEP KHANDELWAL

Judgement Text

Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA No.11/Del/2020 (Arising out of ITA No.1690/Del/2017) ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 Rishi Goyal E-585, Greater Kailash-2 New Delhi-110 048 PAN-AALPG 5610P Vs. Dy.CIT, Circle-46(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sandeep Khandelwal, CA Respondent by Sh. Kanv Bali, Senior Departmental Representative ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM: (A) This Miscellaneous Application (‘MA’, for short) is filed by the assessee in respect of order dated 12/12/2019 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’, for short) in assessee’s appeal vide ITA No.1690/Del/2017. In the present MA, the assessee has requested for recall of aforesaid order dated 12/12/2019 of ITAT; and for hearing of the assessee’s appeal on merits. MA.11/Del/2020 Rishi Goyal vs. DCIT Page 2 of 4 (B) On perusal of records, we find that the aforesaid appeal of the assessee was fixed for hearing on 11/12/2019. At the time of hearing, the assessee was represented by none. Vide aforesaid order dated 12/12/2019 of ITAT, the assessee’s appeal was dismissed ex-parte, qua the appellant assessee. However, in paragraph (E) of the aforesaid order, it was clarified that the assessee would be at liberty, to approach ITAT for restoration of the appeal in accordance with provision to Rule-24 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. (B.1) In the present MA before us, request has been made for restoration of appeal, stating as under: “3. That assessee had authorized CA Sandeep Khandewal, Partner of MNRS & Associates, Chartered Accountants to represent his case before Hon’ble ITAT. 4. That on the last date of hearing i.e. 11/12/2019, the above said authorized representative proposed to file paperbook and also seek adjournment. For the said purpose, the authorized representative deputed his colleague Miss Kanishka Babbar to appear on date of hearing on 11/12/2019. 5. However, due to heavy traffic jam coupled with the fact that she was coming from outstation, Miss Kanishka Babbar got late for the hearing and by the time she reached ITAT, the matter was already heard ex-parte. 6. That non-compliance on the date of hearing was due to bonafide reasons and circumstances beyond the control of the assessee and as such MA.11/Del/2020 Rishi Goyal vs. DCIT Page 3 of 4 the Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to recall the ex-parte order in the interest of justice for hearing and for granting opportunity for representation of the same on merits. 7. That affidavit of CA Sandeep Khandelwal and the assessee is enclosed in support and confirmation of above position. 8. That appellant is keen to pursue the appeal and undertake to comply with all the notices for disposal of appeal.” (B.1.1) The assessee has filed affidavit of Sri Rishi Goyel, the assessee; and that of the aforesaid Sri Sandeep Khandelwal in support of the MA. (B.2) At the time of hearing, the Ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee relied on the MA and the aforesaid affidavits. The Ld. Sr. DR for Revenue left it to the discretion of the Bench to decide whether the aforesaid order dated 12/12/2019 of ITAT is to be recalled; and whether the assessee’s appeal is to be restored for hearing on merits. (B.2.1) On perusal of the MA and the accompanying affidavits, which have been discussed in foregoing paragraphs (B), (B.1) and (B.1.1) of this order, we are satisfied within the meaning of Rule 24 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, that this is a fit case for setting aside aforesaid order dated 12/12/2019 of ITAT, MA.11/Del/2020 Rishi Goyal vs. DCIT Page 4 of 4 and for restoration of the assessee’s appeal. Accordingly, we set aside the aforesaid order dated 12/12/2019 of ITAT and restore the assessee’s appeal vide ITA No.1690/Del/2019 for hearing on merits. (C) In the result, this Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed. Our order was already pronounced orally on 16 th September, 2022 in Open Court, in the presence of representatives of both sides, after conclusion of the hearing. Now this order in writing is signed today on 19.09.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 19.09.2022 Pk Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI