Choudhary Rakesh Kumar, Jammu V. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu

MA 15/ASR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4883 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 23-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 12-01-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR BEFORE SH.T.S.KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M. A. NO.15(ASR)/2016 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A NO.541(ASR)/2013) ASSESSMENT YEAR:2007-08 CH. RAKESH KUMAR RAIPUR SATWARI, JAMMU. PAN:AAQPC3662E VS. DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMMU. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. JOGINDER SINGH (CA) RESPONDENT BY: SH. RAHUL DHAWAN (DR) DATE OF HEARING: 23.09.2016 DATE OF PRONOU NCEMENT: 21.10.2016 ORDER PER N. K. CHOUDHRY (JM): THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE FOR RECALLING THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE TR IBUNAL, DATED 20.12.2013, PASSED IN ITA NO.541(ASR)/2013 FOR ASST . YEAR:2007-08. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THA T THE HONBLE BENCH HAS DISPOSED OF THE SAID APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF TECHNICAL DEFECTS POINTED OUT IN DEFECT MEMO WHICH ARE DISCUS SED AS UNDER: THE MAIN DEFECT TAKEN IN THE MEMO IS THAT THE APPE AL WAS TIME BARRED BY 6 DAYS. IN THIS REGARD, IT IS TO HUMBLY S UBMIT THAT THE ORDER OF CIT (APPEAL) LUDHIANA, DATED 21.05.13 AGAINST WHICH THE APPEAL WAS FILLED WAS RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT ON 14.06.2013 AND THE APPELLANT WAS REQUIRED TO FILE APPEAL BEFORE ITAT, AMRITSAR ON OR BEFORE 13.08.2013. THE APPELLANT, HOWEVER, FILED THE APPEAL ON 18.08.2013. IN THIS CONTEXT , IT IS TO HUMBLY SUBMIT THAT THE WHOLE OF JAMMU PROVINCE OF J & K STATE WAS UNDER CURFEW FROM 10 TH AUGUST 2013 TO 15 TH AUGUST 2015 (I.E FRIDAY) ( COPY OF NEWSPAPER REPORTS IN THIS CONTEXT ARE ENCLOSED). DU E TO THE CURFEW MA NO.15(ASR)/2016 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.541(ASR)/2013 ASST. YEAR : 2007-08 2 RESTRICTIONS IN THE CITY, THE APPELLANT WAS UNABLE TO FILE THE APPEAL IN TIME WHICH AS PER THE REGISTRY IS DELAYED BY SIX DAYS. I T IS AS SUCH REQUESTED TO CONDONE THE DELAY AS DELAY WAS CAUSED DUE TO THE CI RCUMSTANCES BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE APPELLANT. AFFIDAVIT IS FILED IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIM OF APPELLANT. ANOTHER DEFECT POINTED OUT IN MEMO IS THAT ORIGINAL ORDER OF CIT(A) IS NOT FILLED. IT THIS CONTEXT, IT IS TO SUBMIT THAT T HE CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER OF CIT(A), LUDHIANA IS ENCLOSED HEREWITH FOR YOUR KIND CONSIDERATION. NEXT DEFECT POINTED OUT IN MEMO WAS THAT THE PAGE N O 18 OF ORDER OF CIT(A) WAS NOT FILED. IT IS TO HUMBLY SUBMIT THAT T HE CERTIFIED COPY OF WHOLE ORDER IS ENCLOSED HEREWITH AS REFERRED IN PARA ABOV E. LAST DEFECT POINTED OUT IN MEMO WAS THAT THE FEE OF RS.10000/- WAS DEPOSITED UNDER THE HEAD 400 INSTEAD OF HEAD 300. I N THIS CONTEXT, IT IS TO SUBMIT THAT THE APPELLANT HAS DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT OF FEE OF RS.10,000/- AND ENCLOSED THE CHALLAN WITH THE FORM 36 SUBMITTED WITH THE HON'BLE BENCH, HOWEVER, INADVERTENTLY, THE HEAD HAS BEEN WR ONGLY SELECTED AS 400 INSTEAD OF 300. IT IS TO HUMBLY PRAY THAT THE A PPELLANT HAS AGAIN PAID THE FEE OF RS.10,000/- UNDER THE HEAD 300 AND THE C HALLAN IS ENCLOSED FOR YOUR KIND REFERENCE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS, THE APPELLANT HAS REMOVED ALL THE DEFECTS POINTED OUT IN THE EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE HONBLE BENCH IN ITA NO.541(ASR)/2013 DATED 20.12.2013. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATE D 20.12.2016 MAY BE RECALLED FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION ON MERITS, TO WHICH THE LEARNED DR OPPOSED AND ARGUED THAT, LET THE ASSESSEE TO FILE F RESH APPEAL. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE BOTH PARTIES AND HAVE PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE OBJECTION OF LD. DR ALSO L OGICAL BUT BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY REMOVED THE DEFECT, THEREFORE, IN EXPEDIENCY AND TO CUT SHORT DELAY DUE TO TECHNICALITIES, WE FEEL IT A PPROPRIATE TO ALLOW THE ASSESSEE APPEAL IN IT PRESENT FORM ITSELF. HENCE, W E ARE SATISFIED WITH THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR RECTI FYING THE DEFECT POINTED MA NO.15(ASR)/2016 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.541(ASR)/2013 ASST. YEAR : 2007-08 3 OUT IN EX-PARTE ORDER. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE R ECALL THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 20.12.2013 AN D DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO FIX THE MAIN APPEAL FOR HEARING IN DUE COURSE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 .10.2016. SD/- SD/- (T. S. KAPOOR) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER DATED:21.10.2016. /PK/ PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE: (2) THE (3) THE CIT(A), (4) THE CIT, (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER