Shri Samar Singh Gaur, Bhopal V. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Officer 1(1), Bhopal

MA 132/IND/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0288 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 19-11-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R R MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: VIBHASH KHEDEKAR
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 132/IND/2012 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 424/IND/2010) A.Y.2006-07 SAMAR SINGH GAUR, BHOPAL PAN ABEPG 5388 C :: APPLICANT VS ACIT-1(1), BHOPAL :: RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI VIBHASH KHEDEKAR RESPONDENT BY SHRI R.R. MEENA DATE OF HEARING 5 . 4 .201 3 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 5 . 4 .201 3 O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION U/S 254(2) OF THE A CT IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE TR IBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 21.7.2011 DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE A SSESSEE FOR NON- 2 PROSECUTION AS ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR ON THE APP OINTED DATE AS THE ASSESSEE WAS OUT OF STATION AT ANDAMAN & NICOBA R WHERE HE WAS EXECUTING HIS CONTRACT. 2. DURING HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE , SHRI VIBHASH KHEDEKAR, ADVANCED HIS ARGUMENTS WHICH IS IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS MENTIONED IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WHICH IS DULY SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT STATING REASONING OF NON-APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE APPOINTED DATE. THEREFORE, IT WAS REQUESTED THAT THE EXPARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 21.7.2011 MAY BE RECALL ED. HOWEVER, THE LD. SR. DR CONTENDED THAT IT WAS THE DUTY OF TH E ASSESSEE TO REMAIN PRESENT ON THE APPOINTED DATE. 3. WE HAVE PERUSED THE RECORD AND CONSIDERED THE AR GUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LEARNED RESPECTIVE COUNSEL. UNDER T HE FACTS NARRATED HEREINABOVE AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRINCI PLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT SUBS TANTIAL CAUSE OF JUSTICE MUST PREVAIL ON TECHNICALITIES ESPECIALLY W HEN THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THE REASONS OF NON-APPEARANCE AS MENTION ED IN THE APPLICATION, THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NO PERSON SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD, CONSEQUENTLY, THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE 3 TRIBUNAL DATED 21.7.2011 IS RECALLED. THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE WILL BE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 2.5.2013. SINCE THI S DATE WAS DULY PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AND NOTED BY THE LD. C OUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, NO SEPARATE NOTICE OF HEARING WILL BE ISS UED BY THE REGISTRY. FINALLY, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSE SSEE IS ALLOWED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN T HE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCL USION OF THE HEARING ON 5.4.2013. SD SD (R.C.SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER DATED: 5.4.2013 COPY TO: APPELLANT, RESPONDENT, CIT, CIT(A), DR, GU ARD FILE !VYS!