V.M. Besan & Chana Dal Mill, Borsad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-3(4), Petlad

MA 116/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9207 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 28-06-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y P VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: CHIRAG R SHAH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD D BENCH BEFORE: SHRI D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTAN T MEMBER M.A. NO.116/AHD/2011 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.4171/AHD/2008 A.Y.2005-06 V.M. BESAN & CHANA DAL MILLS AT & PO BHETASI ANKLAV DIST.-ANAND APPELLANT VS. THE I.T.O., WARD 3(4) PETLAD RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI Y.P. VERMA, SR. D.R. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI CHIRAG R. SHAH, A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 02.11.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.11.2012 / ORDER PER : D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION THE ASSESSEE WANTS US TO RECALL OUR EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 01.09.2009 ON THE GROUND T HAT NOTICE WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR DATE OF HEARING. 2. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE RECORD WE FIND THAT THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 21.05.2009. ON THA T DATE AN APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHI CH WAS ALLOWED AND DATE OF HEARING WAS FIXED FOR 01.09.2009. SINCE THE DAT E OF HEARING ON 01.09.2009 WAS GIVEN ON THE APPLICATION OF ASSESSEE IN THE OPE N COURT, THERE WAS NO OCCASION TO SEND NOTICE FOR THIS HEARING. THUS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE M.A. NO.116/AHD/2011 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.4171/AHD/2008 A.Y.2005-06 2 THAT HE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY NOTICE FOR HEARING ON 0 1.09.2009 IS DEVOID OF ANY MERIT AND ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO MAKE OUT A CASE TH AT HE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE IN NOT APPEARING ON THE DATE OF HE ARING ON 01.09.2009 AS REQUIRED BY RULE 24 OF THE I.T.A.T., RULES WHICH RE ADS AS UNDER:- HEARING OF APPEAL EX-PARTE FOR DEFAULT OF THE APPEL LANT. 24. WHERE, ON THE DAY FIXED FOR HEARING OR ON ANY O THER DATE TO WHICH THE HEARING MAY BE ADJOURNED, THE APPELLAN T DOES NOT APPEAR IN PERSON OR THROUGH AN AUTHORIZED REPRESENT ATIVE WHEN THE APPEAL IS CALLED ON FOR HEARING, THE TRIBUNAL MAY D ISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERITS AFTER HEARING THE RESPONDENT: PROVIDED THAT WHERE AN APPEAL HAS BEEN DISPOSED OF AS PROVID ED ABOVE AND THE APPELLANT APPEARS AFTERWARDS AND SATI SFIES THE TRIBUNAL THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR HIS NO N-APPEARANCE, WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED ON FOR HEARING THE TRIBU NAL SHALL MAKE AN ORDER SETTING ASIDE THE EX-PARTE ORDER AND RESTO RING THE APPEAL. 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO REC ALL OUR EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 01.09.2009. 4. IN THE RESULT, THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 02 .11.2012 SD/- SD/- (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (D.K. TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER TRUE COPY N.K. CHAUDHARY, SR. P.S. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPLICANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) 5. THE DR, AHMEDABAD 6. THE GUARD FILE BY ORDER AR,ITAT,AHMEDABAD