Subodh Gupta, Delhi V. JCIT, New Delhi

MA 173/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6212 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 16-12-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 19-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

1 M.A No. 173/Del/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “B” BENCH: NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A NO. 173/Del/2018 In ( I.T.A. No. 955/DEL/2016 A.Y 2011-12) Subodh Gupta D-3, East Jyoti Nagar Shahdara Delhi PAN: AEVPG4646M vs JCIT Range-34 New Delhi APPLICANT RESPONDENT Applicant by Shri Jai Bhagwan Sharma, CA Respondent by Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 17.12.2021 Date of Pronouncement 17.12.2021 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : This Miscellaneous Application has been filed on behalf of the Authorized Representative of the assessee seeking recalling of the order dated 7/12/2017. 2. An affidavit by the assessee has been filed stating the reason for non appearance. The contents of the affidavit are reproduced as under:- 2 M.A No. 173/Del/2018 Dear Sir, Sub: Affidavit regarding non appearance before Hon’ble ITAT on First Date of Hearing. Ref: Assessment year 2011 -12 With reference to the above cited matter, I submit the following facts for your kind consideration. That due to sudden death of Late Sh. Ram Nath Sharma (Elder Brother of my Authorised Representative) the case could not be represented before your highness on 13.11.2017. As a result due to non appearance of appellant, case has been technically dismissed on merits giving liberty to assessee to move application explaining its non appearance before the ITAT on the appointed date. My affidavit detailing the aforesaid facts and these may kindly be placed before the Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal for admission of my appeal. 3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made in the affidavit of the assessee. 4. Ld. DR opposed the submissions and submitted that the assessee ought to have filed application seeking adjournment on that date. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the Tribunal had dismissed the appeal by observing as under:- 3 M.A No. 173/Del/2018 “5. Thus, the ITAT in the case of Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has held that issuance of notice under Rule 19 itself does not make the appeal admissible. Non-attendance makes the appeal defective and the assessee has to correct the same by giving proper explanation. Respectfully following the order of ITAT in the case of Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. (supra), we hold the appeal to be unadmitted with a liberty to assessee to move application explaining its non appearance before the ITAT on the appointed date.” 6. Looking to the facts and the submissions made before us, we are of the considered view that the assessee had reasonable cause for none appearance on the date when the appeal was fixed for hearing. Therefore, we recall our order dated 13/11/2017 and direct the Registry to fix the ITA No. 955/Del/2016 for hearing on 16/02/2022. Above decision was pronounced on conclusion of Virtual Hearing in the presence of both the parties on 17th December, 2021. Sd/- Sd/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) (KUL BHARAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *R. N* 4 M.A No. 173/Del/2018 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI