Pooja Fashion , Hyderabad V. ACIT ,Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad

MA 128/Hyd/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2935 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Next Hearing Date: 01-09-2022
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 28-07-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. The present Miscellaneous Application is filed by the petitioner / assessee aggrieved by the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal dt.27.01.2022 in ITA No.500/Hyd/2021 for A.Y.2019-20 seeking to recall or modify the said order u/s 254(2) of the Act. 2. The brief facts of the petition are that the matter was posted for hearing for the first time on 25.01.2022. On the very first day, the Tribunal passed the order thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee. The record shows that none appeared on 27.01.2022. MA No.128/Hyd/2022 in ITA 500/Hyd/2021 Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/s. Pooja Fashion, Hyderabad. PAN : AATFP2385C. Vs. ACIT, Central Circle 1(4), Hyderabad (Petitioner/ Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri Kumar Pal Tated, CA Revenue by : Sri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date of hearing: 02.09.2022 Date of pronouncement: 06.09.2022 M.A.No.128/Hyd/2022 2 3. Before us, ld.AR submitted that the learned lower authorities have decided the issue without discussing or deliberating the factual matrix of the case as the assessee failed to appear before the ld.CIT(A) and Tribunal due to Covid – Pandemic situations prevailing in the country. It was also submitted by the ld.AR that even the copy of the notice of hearing was not served upon the assessee. Ld.AR further submitted that as the assessee has sufficient cause for not putting in appearance before us. The ld.AR relied upon Rule 24 of Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 and submitted that the exparte order may kindly be set aside and the appeal be restored. Further, ld.AR submitted that no link was shared with the assessee. He had prayed that the matter may kindly be recalled. 4. On the other hand, ld.DR submitted that in the present case, the order was passed by the first appellate authority on 23.09.2021 and before the first appellate authority also, assessee has not appeared and therefore, the assessee was habitual defaulter and the order passed by the Tribunal should not be recalled. 5. In rebuttal, during the appellate proceedings before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee could not appear before him during the period from 30.04.2021 to 14.09.2021 as Pandemic was going on and there were no means with the assessee to communicate with the ld.CIT(A) / instruct the counsel seeking the time. He relied on the Hon'ble Apex Court's recent directions dated 27-04-2021 in M.A.No.665/2021 in SM(W)C No.3/2020 'In Re Cognizance for extension of limitation' wherein it was made clear that in such cases where the limitation period (including that prescribed for institution as well as termination) shall stand excluded from 14 th of March, 2021 till further orders. M.A.No.128/Hyd/2022 3 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record and also the orders passed by lower authorities and the ex-parte order passed by the Tribunal on 27.01.2022. Undoubtedly, on 25.01.2022, the assessee did not appear when the matter was heard. However, before us, ld.AR submitted that assessee failed to appear due to Covid – Pandemic situations prevailing in the country, and hence, assessee was having sufficient cause for not putting appearance before us. In view of the above reasons and also on account of powers given to the Tribunal under Rule 24 of Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963, we hereby recall the order dt.27.01.2022. The Registry is directed to issue a notice for hearing on 29.09.2022. Thus, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed. 7. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 06 th September, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (RAMA KANTA PANDA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (LALIET KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, dated 06 th September, 2022. TYNM/sps M.A.No.128/Hyd/2022 4 Copy to: S.No Addresses 1 M/s. Pooja Fashion, No.5-1-815/5, KJ Market, Koti, Hyderabad. 2 ACIT, Central Circle 1(4), Hyderabad. 3 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 11, Hyderabad. 4 Pr. CIT, Central, Hyderabad. 5 DR, ITAT Hyderabad Benches 6 Guard File By Order