Sh. Vimal Kumar Agarwal, V. Income Tax Officer, Kanpur

MA 11/LKW/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5465 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 29-07-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 12-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 15

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. P . K. BANSAL , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ABY T VARKEY , JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO.11/LKW/2016 [ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 195/LKW/2015] ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006 - 07 SHRI VIMAL KUMAR AGARWAL H.NO.945, SECTOR 15 FARIDABAD V. ITO WARD 4(3) KANPUR T AN /PAN : ADDPK2206J (APP LIC ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP LIC ANT BY: SHRI RAKESH GARG, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI AMIT NIGAM, D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 29 07 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 11 08 2016 PER ABY T VARKEY, J.M : O R D E R THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE - APPLICANT AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 3.7.2015 IN ITA NO . 195 / LKW/2015 WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT THE NOTICE SENT BY THE REGISTRY OF THE TRIBUNAL ON 18.5.2015 FIXING THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 25.6.2015 WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AND EVEN THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WAS ALSO NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE ON ENQUIRY FROM THE REGISTRY CAME TO KNOW ABOUT THE FATE OF HIS APPEAL THAT IT HAS BEEN DISMISSED EX - PARTE FOR NON - APPEARANCE OF THE LD. A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE . IT WAS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 3.7.2015 IN ITA NO . 195 / LKW/2015 MAY BE RECALLED AND THE APPEAL MAY BE FIXED FOR FRESH HEARING. [TYPE THE DOCUMENT TITLE] 2 2 . THE LD. D.R. HAS PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 3.7.2015. 3 . WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL VIS - - VIS THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE - APPL ICANT S CASE IS THAT NOTICE OF HEARING FROM THE TRIBUNAL WAS NOT SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE AND SO HE COULD NOT ALERT HIS LAWYER ABOUT THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL LISTED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND IN THAT CASE WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE OU GHT TO BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO PLEAD HIS PART OF THE CASE ON MERIT . WE, THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE RECALL OUR ORDER 3.7.2015 IN ITA NO . 195 / LKW/2015 AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO FIX THIS APPEAL FOR HEARING IN DUE COURSE. 2 . IN THE RESULT, MISCEL LANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11.8.2016. SD/ - SD/ - [P. K. BANSAL ] [ ABY T VARKEY ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 11 TH 1 . APPELLANT AUGUST , 2016 JJ: 0208 COPY FORWARDED TO: 2 . RESPOND ENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR