H.N. Steel Castings Pvt. Ltd., Una V. ITO, Una

MA 142/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3320 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 03-08-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 06-07-2022
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 08-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRIYANKA DHAR
• Section: 274; 254(2)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरणआयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च瀃डीगढ़ 瀈यायपीठ च瀃डीगढ़ 瀈यायपीठच瀃डीगढ़ 瀈यायपीठ च瀃डीगढ़ 瀈यायपीठ ‘‘ए एए ए’, च瀃डीगढ़ च瀃डीगढ़च瀃डीगढ़ च瀃डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. No. 142/CHD/2018 in आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 44/CHD/2018 नधा रण वष / A.Y. : 2013-14 H.N. Steel Castings Pvt.Ltd., VPO : Bathri, The Haroli, Distt. Una (HP). बनाम VS The ITO, Una. थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: AABCH6304C अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent नधा रती क! ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar CA and Shri Bhavesh Jindal, CA राज व क! ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr.DR स ु नवाई क! तार&ख/Date of Hearing : 07.07.2022 उदघोषणा क! तार&ख/Date of Pronouncement : 04.08.2022 आदेश/ORDER PER DIVA SINGH The present Miscellaneous Application in ITA 44/CHD/2018 pertaining to 2013-14 assessment year has been moved by the assessee u/s 254(2) of the Income Tax Act praying for recall of the ex-parte order dated 02.05.2018. The prayer for recall is made on the grounds pleading that inadvertently the adjournment application for the specific date could not be moved as the Managing Director Shri Surinder Kumar Arora remained unwell. It was submitted that since it was a family concern where M.A.142/CHD/2018 In ITA- 44/CHD/2018 Page 2 of 4 the son and the wife both were Directors living in Ludhiana, thus they could not attend to the notice which may have been sent at the factory premises in Himachal Pradesh. It was further pleaded that the company was facing financial crunch due to adverse business/market conditions and only a Gateman was taking care of the factory who possibly did not understand and had not informed the assessee. Accordingly, giving his oral undertaking, the ld. AR made a prayer for recall of the ex-parte order. 2.1 Inviting specific attention to paragraph 6 of the aforesaid order wherein the ITAT has provided opportunity to the assessee for prayer of recall of the order in case the assessee was in a position to explain the reasons for non representation on the said date. The reasons pleaded on record, it was his prayer may be considered sufficient for recall of the order. 3. The ld. Sr.DR objected to the prayer for recall stating that in the facts of the present case the assessee has not participated in the assessment proceedings as a result of which, the assessment order was an ex-parte order. It was also her submission that even before the CIT(A), the assessee has remained unrepresented. In the circumstances, it was her submission that since the assessee is not appearing before any of the authorities, the prayer for recall may be dismissed. M.A.142/CHD/2018 In ITA- 44/CHD/2018 Page 3 of 4 4. The ld. AR inviting attention to the impugned order once again submitted that the assessee has been granted opportunity by the ITAT in para 6 to pray for recall if on facts the assessee could address the reasons. It was also his submission that in the facts of the present case, the assessee's factory premises are in Himachal Pradesh and when para 2 of the application moved by the assessee is seen, the assessee has explained the reason for non- representation. Para 2 of the application reads as under : “ 2. That Company is passing from financial crunch from last several years due to adverse business/markets conditions. Managing Director are residing in Ludhiana and Factory is established in Village Bathu, Una, Himachal Pradesh. A gateman is taking care of the factory.” 4.1 It was his prayer that on account of the illness of the Managing Director and it being a family concern, the assessee before the ITAT could not be present. Accordingly, it was his prayer that the order may be recalled. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is seen that the present appeal came up before the ITAT on 02.05.2018 for the very first time and on the said date, the assessee was not present. Considering the facts as pleaded on record which are not shown to be incorrect and accepting the oral undertaking of the ld. AR, exercising the powers as vested by proviso to Rule 24 of the ITAT Rules 1963, we deem it M.A.142/CHD/2018 In ITA- 44/CHD/2018 Page 4 of 4 appropriate to recall the ex-parte order relying upon decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Ansal Housing Construction Ltd. 274 ITR 131 (Del). 5.1 Accordingly, parties are directed to be ready for arguing the appeal on 10.08.2022. The date was pronounced in the presence of the parties after considering their convenience and therefore, no notice for the said date would be given. Said order was pronounced in the Open Court at the time of hearing itself. 6. In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on 04 August,2022. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (DIVA SINGH) लेखा लेखालेखा लेखा सद瀡य सद瀡यसद瀡य सद瀡य/ Accountant Member 瀈याियक 瀈याियक瀈याियक 瀈याियक सद瀡य सद瀡यसद瀡य सद瀡य/ Judicial Member “Poonam” आदेश क琉 灹ितिलिप अ灡ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ牸/ The Appellant 2. 灹瀄यथ牸/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु猴/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु猴 (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय 灹ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च瀃डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड榁 फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar