Smt.Leela Bai , Bangalore V. Income Tax Officer Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

MA 166/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8677 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-12-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 13-06-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PADMA MEENAKSHI
• Assessee Lawyers: G SATHYANARAYANA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC-B BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.P. NO. 166/BANG/2018 (IN ITA NO . 237 /BANG/201 8) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 09 - 10 SMT. LEELA BAI, W/O. B. NATHAMAL, C/O. PARAS JEWELLERS, NO. 935, NAGARATHPET, BANGALORE 560 002. PAN: ABWPB6061F VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5 (2)(1), BANGALORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI G. SATHYANARAYANA, CA RESPONDENT BY : SMT. PADMA MEENAKSHI, JCIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 07 . 1 2 .2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19 . 1 2 .2018 O R D E R PER SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS M.P. IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SEEKING RECALL O F EX-PARTE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 20.03.2018. 2. THE CONTENTS OF THE M.P. ARE REPRODUCED HEREINBE LOW FOR READY REFERENCE. THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS BEING FILED U/S 2 54(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ('THE ACT') IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ORDER DATED 20THMARCH, 2018 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE 1TAT, BANGALO RE 'B' BENCH, THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE WAS NOT ABLE TO APPEA R FOR THE HEARING IN RESPECT OF THE ITA NO. 237/BANG/2018 FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 (COPY OF THE ORDER IS ENCLOSED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE 1) HENCE THE APPELLANT NOT HAD ANY OPPORTUNITY OF BEIN G HEARD IN THE CASE. AT PARAGRAPH3 ON PAGE2 OF THE SUBJECT ORDER, THIS H ON'BLE BENCH HAS NOTED THE FOLLOWING: OBSERVATION OF HON'BLE TRIBUNAL 3. THE APPEAL WAS FIRST FIXED FOR HEARING ON 28.02. 2018. ON THIS DATE, M.P. NO. 166/BANG/2018 (IN ITA NO. 237/BANG/2018) PAGE 2 OF 3 NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND HENCE, HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 20.03.2018 AND THE NOTICE OF HEARING W AS SENT TO ASSESSEE BY RPAD AT THE ADDRESS PROVIDED BY THE ASS ESSEE IN FORM 36. ON THIS DATE ALSO, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF T HE ASSESSEE. HENCE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS HEARD EX-PARTE QUA T HE ASSESSEE. THE ID. DR OF REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDER CIT (A). OUR SUBMISSION IT IS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HONOURABLE TRIBUNAL TO C ONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:- THE ORDER HAVING BEEN PASSED BY LEARNED CIT (APPEAL S) IN TOTAL DISREGARD OF AND IN VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATU RAL JUSTICE MAKES THE ORDER BAD IN LAW AND LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. HENCE THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT OPPORTUNITY ON THE GROUND OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE MAY BE PROVIDED BY HEA RING THE CASE. PRAYER THE APPELLANT THEREFORE, BY THE PRESENT APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT SEEKS TO RECALL THE ORDER FOR DOI NG JUSTICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 3. IN COURSE OF HEARING OF THIS M.P., IT WAS POINTE D OUT BY THE BENCH THAT AS PER THE PRESENT M.P. FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, NO REASON H AS BEEN SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AS TO HOW IT CAN BE ACCEPTED THAT THERE WA S REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE APPOINTED DAT E OF HEARING. IN REPLY, THE LD. AR OF ASSESSEE HAD NOTHING TO SAY. HE SIMP LY SUBMITTED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THIS EX-PARTE TRIBUNAL ORDER S HOULD BE RECALLED AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE DECIDED AFTER HEAR ING THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. DR OF REVENUE SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE IMPUGNE D TRIBUNAL ORDER, THE ISSUE WAS DECIDED ON MERIT AND THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT POINTED OUT ANY REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE DOES NO T GET ANY BENEFIT UNDER RULE 24 OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 196 3. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND AS P ER THE CONTENTS OF THE M.P. REPRODUCED ABOVE, IT IS SEEN THAT THIS IS NOT THE C ASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THERE WAS ANY REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE O F THE ASSESSEE ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING AND HENCE, THE ASSESSEE D OES NOT GET ANY HELP FROM RULE 24 OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES , 1963. AS PER THE M.P. NO. 166/BANG/2018 (IN ITA NO. 237/BANG/2018) PAGE 3 OF 3 IMPUGNED TRIBUNAL ORDER, THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE WAS D ECIDED ON MERIT. SUCH A TRIBUNAL ORDER CAN BE RECALLED ONLY UNDER RULE 24 O F INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963IF THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW AND ESTABLISH THAT THERE WAS ANY REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE RE IS NO SUCH CASE MADE OUT BY THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, I FIND NO MERIT IN THE PRESENT M.P. FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE M.P. FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- (ARUN KUMAR GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 19 TH DECEMBER, 2018. /MS/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 4. CIT(A) 2. RESPONDENT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 3. CIT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.