Shri Sanjaykumar Jain(HUF), Surat V. The Income tax Officer,(OSD-III)Range-2, Surat

MA 124/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9223 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 02-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A TIRKEY
• Assessee Lawyers: MURTUZA PALKIWALA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, D BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KUMAR SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER A ND SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO.124/AHD/2012 IN I.T.A. NO. 299/AHD/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07) SANJAY KUMAR JAIN E-3638-3653, RAGHUKUL TEXTILE MARKET, RING ROAD, SURAT-395002 VS. ITO, (OSD-III), RANGE 2, SURAT PAN/GIR NO. : AADHS9942Q (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI MURTUZA PALKIWALA, AR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI A TIRKEY, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING: 05.10.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05.10.2012 O R D E R PER SHRI A. K. GARODIA, AM:- THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE SEEKING RECALL OF AN EX-PARTE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 10.01.20 12. IT WAS SUBMITTED IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING REGARDING THE DATE OF HEARING ON 18.11.2011 AND 10. 01.2012 WERE NEVER RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, THE ASSESS EE WAS NOT AWARE ABOUT THESE DATES OF HEARING AND FOR THIS REASON, NONE CO ULD APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING. M.A.NO.124 /AHD/2012 2 2. IN THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE US ALSO, THE SAM E CONTENTIONS WERE RAISED BY THE LD. A.R. AND HE ALSO SUBMITTED AN AFF IDAVIT OF THE ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT OF THE CONTENTIONS RAISED IN THE MISCELL ANEOUS APPLICATION. 3. LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING SE NT BY THE TRIBUNAL WAS RETURNED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REM ARKS NOT KNOWN AND HENCE, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THERE IS ANY APPARENT MISTAKE IN THE TRIBUNAL ORDER. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FI ND THAT IT IS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARIN G WAS NOT SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THERE IS REA SONABLE CAUSE FOR NON APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, AS PER R ULE 24 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES 1963, WE RECALL THIS EX-PARTE TRIBUN AL ORDER AND FIX THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 04.12.2012. SINCE THE DATE O F HEARING WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT, NO SEPARATE NOTICE OF HEARING IS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 6. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE M ENTIONED HEREINABOVE. SD./- SD./- (MUKUL KUMAR SHRAWAT) (A. K. GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SP 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 BY ORDER 6. THE GUARD FILE AR,ITAT,AHMEDABAD M.A.NO.124 /AHD/2012 3 1. DATE OF DICTATION 09/10/12 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 10/10/12.OTHER MEMBER 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P .S./P.S. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 05/10/2012 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S./P.S.12/10 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 12/1 0/2012 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK .. 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER . 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER. .