M.K.Kotirathnam, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

MA 127/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3574 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 27-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 24-07-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH
• Assessee Lawyers: N DEVANATHAN
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , ! ' , # $% BEFORE SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NO.127/MDS/2015 (IN ITA NO. 996/MDS/2015) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 M.K.KOTIRATHNAM, NEW NO.16, OLD NO.12, GANDHI AVENUE, PURASAWALKAM, CHENNAI-600084. PAN AAQPK5883P. (APPLICANT) VS THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD -10(2), CHENNAI-34. ( /RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI N. DEVANATHAN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.V.SREEKANTH, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 27.11.2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 27.11.2015 / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, THE ASSESSEE SEE KS RECALL OF THE EX PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 20.7.20 15. - - MA 127/15 2 2. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO WILLFUL OR WANTON NON-APPEARANCE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL BUT IT WAS DUE TO FAILURE OF THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE TO AP PEAR BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE OF HEARING ON THE REASON THAT HE WAS PRE-OCCUPIED WITH THE HIGH COURT MATTERS. HENCE, I T WAS SUBMITTED THAT THERE EXISTS GOOD AND SUFFICIENT REA SON FOR NON- APPEARANCE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL AND PRAYED THAT IN TERMS OF RULE 24 OF ITAT RULES, THE EX PARTE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUN AL MAY BE RECALLED. HE RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE DELHI H IGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. HEMLA HOZIERY DYEING & PRINTING MILL S (P) LTD. 286 ITR 646 (DEL.). FURTHER, HE RELIED ON VARIOUS SUPR EME COURT DECISIONS FOR THE PROPOSAL THAT IF THE ASSESSEES C OUNSEL FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE OF HEARING TO R EPRESENT THE PARTY, THEN THE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT SUFFER FOR THE INACTION, DELIBERATE OMISSION OR MISDEMEANOR OF THE ASSESSEE S COUNSEL AND THE JUDICIAL FORUM CANNOT BE A PARTY TO INNOCEN T PARTY SUFFERING INJUSTICE, WHICH CASE IS KEPT ON RECORD. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR HAS NOT RAISED ANY SERIOUS OBJECTI ON. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD. THE REASON EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON- - - MA 127/15 3 APPEARANCE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL IS THAT THE ASSESSE ES COUNSEL HAS TO APPEAR IN CERTAIN CASES BEFORE THE HIGH COUR T. WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THERE IS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE OF HEARING TO REPR ESENT ITS CASE AND WE ACCEDE WITH THE PRAYER OF THE LD. AR. ACCOR DINGLY, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE RECALL EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 20.7.2015 AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO POST THE APPEAL FOR FRESH HE ARING IN THE NORMAL COURSE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON FRIDAY, THE 27 TH OF NOV., 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) ( ! ' # $ ) ( N.R.S.GANESAN ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) 1 23 /JUDICIAL MEMBER 4 23 /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 1 /CHENNAI, >2 /DATED, THE 27 TH NOV., 2015. MPO* 2 ?4@' AB@ /COPY TO: 1. A'C4 /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. D (A'C4) /CIT(A) 4. D /CIT 5. @EC F /DR 6. G H4 /GF.