V.Jaisankar, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

MA 174/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4732 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 05-07-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHIVA SRINIVAS
• Assessee Lawyers: T T DURAIRAJ KANDIAR F
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

, / , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A SMC BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A.NO.174/MDS/2016 [IN I.T.A.NO.884/MDS/2016] ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 SHRI V.JAISANKAR, NO.47, MANAPPA MUDALI STREET, KORUKKUPET, CHENNAI 600 021. PAN: AFJPJ 2692 B V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE II(5), CHENNAI 600 034. (APPLICANT) ( /RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI T.T.DURAIRAJ KANDIAR, F.C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHIVA SRINIVAS, JCIT !' /DATE OF HEARING : 23.09.2016 #$% !' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23.09.2016 /O R D E R THE ASSESSEE FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETIT ION PRAYING FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 13.06.20 16. 2. SHRI T.T.DURAIRAJ KANDIAR, THE LEARNED REPRESENT ATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING ISSUED BY THIS TRIBUNAL WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AND IT WAS RECEIVED BY SOMEBODY ELS E AND THE SAME WAS NOT 2 M.A.NO.174/MDS/2016 BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, T HE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAK EN UP FOR HEARING ON 13.06.2016. THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED TH AT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO ARGUE THE CASE ON M ERIT. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI SHIVA SRINIVAS, THE LEARNE D DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO REASONABL E CAUSE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON 13.06.2016 WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING. HAVING HEARD THE L EARNED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE AND THE LEARNED DEPARTMENT REPRESENTAT IVE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE NON APPEARANCE OF T HE ASSESSEE IS NOT DUE TO NEGLIGENCE. BUT, BECAUSE THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS RECEIVED BY SOMEBODY ELSE AND NOT BY THE ASSESSEE. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF T HE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE ON THE PART OF THE ASS ESSEE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP F OR HEARING ON 13.06.2016. THEREFORE, IN EXERCISE OF POWERS CONFERRED ON THIS TRIBUNAL UNDER PROVISO TO RULE 24 OF THE INCOME-TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULE S, 1963, THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 13.06.2016 IS HEREBY RECALLED. 4. NOW THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.884/MDS /2016 STANDS RESTORED ON THE FILE OF THIS TRIBUNAL. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO POST THE APPEAL FOR FINAL DISPOSAL ON 22.11.2016. SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING IS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH PARTIES, NOTICE OF HEARING NEED NOT BE 3 M.A.NO.174/MDS/2016 ISSUED TO EITHER PARTY FOR HEARING ON 22.11.2016. I N OTHER WORDS, COPY OF THIS ORDER SHALL BE TREATED AS NOTICE FOR HEARING. 5. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS, THE MISCELLANEOUS P ETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( . . . ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, &' /DATED, THE 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2016. SP. (!)* +*%! /COPY TO: 1. APPLICANT 2. (,-. /RESPONDENT 3. /! ( )/CIT(A) 4. /! /CIT, 5. *0 (! /DR 6. 12 3 /GF.