Royal Touch Aluminium Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad V. The Addl. CIT, Range-5, Ahmedabad

MA 111/AHD/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6840 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 01-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 02-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LALIT P JAIN
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD A BENCH (BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER) M.A. NO: 111/AHD/2018 (IN ITA NO. 144/AHD/2016) (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) ROYAL TOUCH ALUMINUM PVT. LTD. PLOT NO. 30/31, SAKET INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, SARKHEJ BVLA HIGHWAY, NEAR NOVA PETROCHEM, AHMEDABAD-382213 V/S ADD. CIT,RANGE- 5,AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: AACCR8614G APPELLANT BY : SMT. IRA KAPOOR, A.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI LALIT P. JAIN , SR. D.R . ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 21 -12-201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01 -01-2019 PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. BY VIRTUE OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE INTENDS TO RECALL THE IMPUGNE D EX PARTE ORDER DT. 24-11- 2017 PASSED BY THIS TRIBUNAL. M.A. NO 111/ AHD/2018 . A.Y. 2011-12 2 2. THE LD. AR BEFORE US SUBMITTED AS UNDER: 1. THE PRESENT APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE ABOVE MENTI ONED APPLICANT/APPELLANT FOR DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSES BY ORDER DATE D 24.11.17 PASSED BY HONBLE TRIBUNAL EX-PARTE. 2. THE HORRBLE I TAT IN ITS ORDER IN PARA NOS. 2 HAS O BSERVED AS UNDER : - '' AV NOTICED THAT WHEN THE MATTER CAME UP FOR HEA RING, NONE APPEARED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE ASSES SEE DESPITE NOTICE HAVIN G BEEN SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT SLIP AVAILABLE O N RECORD. FROM THIS, IT IS REASONABLE TO INFER THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOU S W PURSUE ITS CASE. HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CITV. D.N BHATTACHARGE E AND ANOTHER , 118 ITR 461 (SC), OBSERVED THAT PREFERRING AN APPEAL MEANS EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. HON 'BLE M.P HIGH COURT IN CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE T UKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP). DISMISSED THE REFERENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT TAKING NECESSARY STEPS. SIMILAR VIEW IS TAKEN BY IT AT DEL HI BENCH IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD , 38 ITD 320. CONSIDERING THE A BOVE, IT APPEARS THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEA L. WE THEREFORE DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION '. 3. THE APPLICANT/APPELLANT MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMI TS THAT THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER:- 3.1. THAT THE ABOVE MENTIONED APPEAL WAS FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE ON 20.01.16. THEREAFTER, HEARING OF THE ABOVE APPEAL WAS FIRST T IME FIXED ON 23.11.17 AND ON THE SAME DATE ON ACCOUNT OF NON-APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT COMPANY THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED EX-PARTE. IN THIS REG ARDS, THE APPELLANT COMPANY SUBMITS THAT THE SOLE NOTICE DATED 14.11.17, FOR WH ICH HEARING WAS FIXED ON 23.11.17 WAS ISSUED AND WAS RECEIVED BY THE WATCH-MAN OF THE APPELLANT COMPANY WHICH INADVERTENTLY LEFT TO BE HANDED OVER BY HIM TO THE CONCERNED PERSONNEL HANDLING ACCOUNTS AND TAXATION MATTER. THUS, SINCE THE WATCH MAN IS NOT LITERATE ENOUGH TO M.A. NO 111/ AHD/2018 . A.Y. 2011-12 3 UNDERSTAND THE PROS AND CONSEQUENCES OF INCOME TAX NOTICES, SO THE DELAY OCCURRED IN HANDING OVER THE IT AT HEARING NOTICE TO THE CON CERNED PERSONNEL. FURTHER THE FACTOR} PREMISES ARE TEMPORARILY CLOSED FROM PAST 1 .5 YEARS, SO ALL THE NOTICES ARE RECEIVED BY THE WATCHMAN AND HANDED OVER TO THE CON CERNED PERSONNEL. THEREFORE, OWING TO THIS BONAFIDE REASON THERE WAS NON-ATTENDA NCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING I.E 23.11.17. THE APPELLANT DEEPLY REGRETS FOR THE INCO NVENIENCE CAUSED TO YOUR GOOD HONOUR AND AT THE SAME TIME PROMISES THAT IN FUTURE DUE CARE WOULD BE TAKEN TO AVOID SUCH A SITUATION. 3.2. THUS, THIS BEING A REASONABLE CAUSE IN THE INT EREST OF THE NATURAL JUSTICE AND EQUITY, THE ASSESSEE REQUESTS YOUR HONOURS TO KINDL Y GRANT A FRESH OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT HIS CASE ON MERITS, AND THUS THEREBY REQUESTING YOUR HONOURS TO RECALL THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE EX-PARTE ORDER. OTHERWISE IT MAY CAUSE GREAT INJUSTICE AND HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANT WITHOUT ANY CAUSE ATTRIBUTABLE TO IT. NEEDLESS TO SAY FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE APPLICANT AS I N DUTY BOUND SHALL FOREVER PRAY AND REMAIN GRATEFUL. 4. THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL BE PLEASED TO ACCEPT THE PR AYER OF THE APPLICANT/APPELLANT AND RECALL THE MATTER. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. DR RAISED NO OBJECTI ON IF THE MATTER IS RECALLED FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AS PER THE PROVISION OF LAW. 4. HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RECOR D. ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDER DT. 24-11-2017, WE FIND THAT IN SPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICES BY THE REGISTRY NEITHER ANY ONE APPEARED NOR THERE WAS ANY ADJOURNMENT APPL ICATION FILED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE FOR THE HEARING ON 24-11-2017. THUS, FOLLO WING THE VARIOUS DECISIONS IN THE CASES OF MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL), HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT REPORTED IN 223 ITR 480(MP) THE TRIBUNAL DISMIS SED THE APPEAL OF M.A. NO 111/ AHD/2018 . A.Y. 2011-12 4 ASSESSEE BY PASSING EX PARTE ORDER FOR NON PROSECUT ION. WE FIND THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT REASON FOR THE ASSESSEE IN NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE SAID DATE OF HEARING [24-11- 2017]. THEREFORE, IN V IEW OF SUBMISSION OF ASSESSEE WE RECALL THE ORDER DATED 24-11-2017 BY ALLOWING TH IS MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. NEXT DATE OF HEARING IN THIS MATTER IS 08/04/ 2019 AND SAME HAS BEEN COMMUNICATED TO BOTH THE PARTIES AND NO SEPARATE NO TICE WILL BE SENT TO ANY OF THE PARTIES. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 01 - 01- 2019 SD/- SD/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TRUE COPY JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 01/01/2019 RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHME DABAD