M/s Oswal Garments Ltd., Ludhiana V. ITO, W-7(2), Ludhiana

MA 111/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0967 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-03-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 08-03-2021
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHOK KHANNA
• Assessee Lawyers: M L JOSHI
• Section: 274; 254(2)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH , ! ' , ' # $ % & ' , () ! BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM & SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM M.A . 111/CHD/2018 IN I.T.A. NO. 1088/CHD/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2010-11) M/S OSWAL GARMENTS LTD., LUDHIANA. VS THE ITO, WARD 7(2), LUDHIANA. ./PAN NO: AAACO2515M /APPELLANT /RESPONDENT /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M.L.JOSHI, ADVOCATE / REVENUE BY : SHRI ASHOK KHANNA, ADDL. CIT /DATE OF HEARING : 08.03.20 21 !'#$%& /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.03.2021 HEARING CONDUCTED VIA WEBEX (*/ ORDER PER DIVA SINGH BY THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION U/S 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1962 IN ITA 1088/CHD/2017 PERTAINING TO 2010-2011 ASSESSMENT YE AR, THE ASSESSEE PRAYS FOR RECALL OF THE EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 20.12.2017. THE PRAYER IS MAD E ON VARIOUS GROUNDS INCLUDING THAT THE NOTICE ISSUED FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING WAS NOT RE CEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. AS PER THE APPLICATION NOTWITHSTANDING THE SAID ARGUMENT, IT WAS ALSO CANV ASSED THAT THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED FOR NON- REPRESENTATION ON THE VERY FIRST DATE OF HEARING IT SELF. 2. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT WAS HIS PRAYER THAT T HE ORDER MAY BE RECALLED AS THE BENCH HAS INCORRECTLY ASSUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERE STED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL WHEREAS IN REALITY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE DATE OF HEARING F IXED IN THIS CASE. 3. THE LD. SR.DR POSED NO OBJECTION TO THE SAID REQ UEST OF THE ASSESSEE. MA-111/CHD/2018 IN ITA 1088/CHD/2017 A.Y. 2010-11 PAGE 2 OF 2 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED TH E MATERIAL ON RECORD. ACCEPTING THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR REMAINING U NREPRESENTED ON THE DATE OF HEARING AS BONAFIDE AND TRUE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS RECALLED E XERCISING THE POWERS AS VESTED BY PROVISO TO RULE 24 OF THE ITAT RULES 1963. SUPPORT IS DRAWN F ROM THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS ANSAL HOUSING CONSTRUCT ION LTD. 274 ITR 131 (DEL). 5. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL IS RESTORED BACK TO ORIG INAL POSITION AND THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 12.04.2021 FOR WHICH DATE NO NOTICE OF HEARING SHALL BE ISSUED TO THE PARTIES AS THE DATE WAS ANNOUNCED IN THE PRE SENCE OF THE PARTIES VIA WEBEX ON THE DATE OF HEARING ITSELF. 6. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10 TH MARCH,2021. SD/- SD/- ( # $ % & ' ) ( ) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (DIVA SINGH) () !/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER !/ JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM '( )* +*% / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. , / CIT 4. , ( )/ THE CIT(A)5. *-. / , /& , 012.3 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. .2 4 / GUARD FILE '( / BY ORDER, 5 / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR