Shri Nandlal Sachdeva, Burhanpur V. The I.T.O., Burhanpur

MA 11/IND/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3765 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-07-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 02-07-2010
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K MITRA
• Assessee Lawyers: R TARWALA

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI V.K. GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MISCELLANEOUS PETITOIN NOS.11 & 12/IND/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS.316 & 317/IND/2009) A.Y. 2000-01 NANDLAL SACHDEVA, PROP. SHRAVAN CLOTH STORES, CHOWK BAZAR, BURHANPUR PAN AEMPS 0178 H APPLICANT VS. ITO, WARD-BURHANPUR RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY : SHRI R. TARWALA, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.K. MITRA, SR. DR O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH BOTH THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SEEKING RECALLING OF THE EXPARTE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL DATED 30.3.2010. 2. DURING HEARING OF THESE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS, MR. R. TARWALA, LD. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THE REASONS FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING OF THE RESPECTIVE APPEAL S. IN SUPPORT OF THE ASSERTION, AFFIDAVITS ARE ALSO FILED WITH THE MISCE LLANEOUS PETITIONS. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI P.K. MITRA, LD. SR. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL BY CONTENDING THAT IT WAS THE DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO REMAIN PRESENT ON THE APPOINTED DATE AND IT SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN LIGHTLY. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF 2 BOTH SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RE CORD. WE ARE SATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR HIS NON-AP PEARANCE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON THE APPOINTED DATE, THEREFORE, THE ORDE R OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 30.3.2010 IS RECALLED. EVEN OTHERWISE, WE ARE OF TH E CONSIDERED OPINION THAT EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION MUST BE GIVEN TO THE APPEL LANTS/RESPONDENTS AND NO PERSON SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD. BOTH THESE A PPEALS ARE FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 21.9.2010. THE ASSES SEE IS DIRECTED NOT TO SEEK UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENT WITHOUT ANY COGENT REA SON ON THE NEXT DATE I.E. 21.9.2009. SINCE THE NEXT DATE WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENT OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AND WAS DULY NOTED, THEREFORE, NO SEPARATE NOTICE OF HEARING SHALL BE I SSUED BY THE REGISTRY. FINALLY, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS OF THE ASSESS EE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS ON 2.7.2010. (V.K. GUPTA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 2.7.2010 {VYAS} COPY TO APPELLANT, RESPONDENT, CIT, CIT(A), DR, GU ARD FILE