M/s Mittal Poultry Farm, Panchkula V. ACIT, Chandigarh

MA 13/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5507 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 06-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO.11/CHD/2017 (IN ITA NO. 236/CHD/2014) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 SH. MUKESH MITTAL, VS. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-I I, PANCHKULA CHANDIGARH PAN NO. ACBPM4280H M.A. NO.12/CHD/2017 (IN ITA NO. 237/CHD/2014) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 SH. MUKESH MITTAL, VS. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-I I, PANCHKULA CHANDIGARH PAN NO. ACBPM4280H & M.A. NO.13/CHD/2017 (IN ITA NO. 239/CHD/2014) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 M/S MITTAL POULTRY FARM, VS. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIR CLE-II, PANCHKULA CHANDIGARH PAN NO. AADFM8031E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. SACHIN JAIN RESPONDENT BY : SMT. CHANDERKANTA DATE OF HEARING : 18.08.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.11.2017 ORDER 2 PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATIONS (RECEIVED IN TRIBUNA L ON 6.1.2017) HAVE BEEN MOVED BY THE APPLICANTS PLEADING THEREIN FOR RECALLING THE COMMON ORDER DATED 18.11.2015 OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSE D IN ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEALS WHICH WERE DISMISSED EX-PARTE FOR WANT OF P ROSECUTION. 2. THE LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT H E WAS PREVENTED BY A REASONABLE CAUSE AS MENTIONED IN THE MISC. PETITION S AND COULD NOT APPEAR ON THE DATE OF HEARING AS DISPUTE BETWEEN THE ASSES SEE AND THE COUNSEL WAS GOING ON, BECAUSE OF WHICH NEITHER THE COUNSEL HIMS ELF APPEARED NOR INFORMED THE DATE OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. ONG OING THROUGH THE DETAILED REASONS STATED IN THE PETITIONS ALONGWITH AFFIDAVITS FURNISHED AND AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT REASONS IN NOT APPEARING BE FORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL. THEREFORE, WE RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 18.11.2015 IN THE ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEALS AND RESTORE THE APPEALS TO THEIR ORIGINAL POSITION TO B E HEARD A FRESH. THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL BE FIXED IN REGULAR COURSE FO R THE PURPOSE OF WHICH, A FORMAL NOTICE BE ISSUED TO THE PARTIES IN TIME. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FI LED BY THE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10.11.2017 SD/- SD/- (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 10 TH NOVEMBER, 2017 RKK 3 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR