, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . , . !' , # $ BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P.NO.122/MDS./2014 ( ./ I.T.A.NO.743/MDS./2014) ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 ) M/S.BUMI GEO ENGINEERING PVT. LTD., NO.85/1,NAC TOWERS II AND III FLOOR, DR.RADHAKRISHNAN SALAI, MYLAPORE, CHENNAI 600 004. VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE I (2), CHENNAI 600 034. PAN AABCB 7316 E ( %& / APPELLANT ) ( '(%& / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : MR.P.RANGA RAMANUJAM, C.A. / RESPONDENT BY : MR.N.MADHAVAN JCIT D.R. / DATE OF HEARING : 10.10.2014 ! /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.10.2014 MP NO.122 /MDS/2014 2 ) / O R D E R PER A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE PRAYING FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.7 43/MDS./2014 DATED 2 ND JUNE, 2014 PASSED EX PARTE FOR NON-APPEARANCE. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE THE FOLLOWING WRITTEN SUBM ISSIONS BEFORE US:- 1. THE APPELLANTS HAVE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE HON . ITAT ON 26.3.2014 AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI -34 DATED 13.01.2014 PASSED U/ S. 143(3) R.W.S. 92CA OF THE ACT, IN CONSONANCE WITH THE ORDER OF TRANSFE R PRICING OFFICER-I, (TPO),CHENNAI DATED 09.01.2013 PASSED U/S. 92CA OF THE ACT AND THE ORDER OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL, CHENNAI DATE D 20.03.2013 PASSED U/S. 144C(5) RWS 144C(8) OF THE ACT. 2. THE APPELLANTS RECEIVED FORM HO.ITAT AN ACKNOW LEDGEMENT AND NOTICE, INTIMATING HEARING ON 2 ND JUNE, 2014. APPENDED TO THIS WAS A DEFECT NOTICE, DIRECTING FURNISHING ADDITIONAL DOCU MENTATION AS SPECIFIED IN SL. NO.7 AND 16 OF THE SAID DEFECT NOTICE. MP NO.122 /MDS/2014 3 3. THE APPELLANTS WERE ON A GENUINE WRONG NOTION TH AT THIS DEFECT IS REQUIRED TO BE RECTIFIED ON OR BEFORE THE DATE MENT IONED IN THE NOTICE. THEREFORE, THE APPELLANT FILED THE NECESSARY DOCUME NTS DIRECTED BY THE HON. TRIBUNAL ON 16.05.2014, IGNORANT OF THE FACT T HAT THE APPEAL WILL BE HEARD ON 02.06.2014, ESPECIALLY IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THIS IS THE FIRST APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT IN THE HISTORY OF THE APPELL ANTS. 4. THEREFORE THE NON APPEARANCE ON THE DATE FIXED F OR THE HEARING WAS DUE TO GENUINE WRONG NOTION AS MENTIONED ABOVE AND CONSIDER THE SAME AS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR FAILURE TO ATTEND THE HEA RING. BEING THE FIRST HEARING, WE PRAY THE HON. TRIBUNAL TO KINDLY RESTOR E THE APPEAL, AND RE-FIX THE SAME AND DECIDE ON THE MERITS OF THE APPEAL. 3. BEFORE US THE LD.AR REQUESTED THAT FOR THE AFOR ESAID REASONS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GRANTED TO PRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE BENCH AND THEREFORE THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL MAY BE RECALLED. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. D.R FIRMLY OBJECTED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD.AR. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSING THE AF FIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT AS REQUEST ED BY THE LD.AR ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSE SSEE TO PRESENT MP NO.122 /MDS/2014 4 ITS CASE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, IN THE INT EREST OF JUSTICE WE HEREBY RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 02.06 .2014. THE REGISTRY IS HEREBY DIRECTED TO POST THE CASE IN THE REGULAR COURSE FOR HEARING. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSI ON OF HEARING ON 10 TH OCTOBER, 2014. SD/- SD/- (V. DURGA RAO) (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 10 TH , OCTOBER, 2014. K S SUNDARAM. COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/CIT (A)/CIT/D.R./GUARD FILE