Smt. Neelima Singh, Satna V. Income Tax Officer, Satna

MA 19/JAB/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0203 (ITAT-JABALPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-09-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 06-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K HALDAR
• Assessee Lawyers: G N PUROHIT

Judgement Text

M.A.NO.19/JAB/2018(A.Y.2009- 10) 1 NEELIM A SINGH VS ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO.19/JAB/2018 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO.13/JAB/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 SMT. NEELIMA SINGH, D/O SHRI SAMAR SINGH PARIHAR, AMILIYA HOUSE, SINGHPUR CHOWK, NAGOD, DIST.-SATNA (MP) PAN:DHLPS 8331H VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SATNA (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY SHRI G. N. PUROHIT, SR. ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY SHRI S. K. HALDAR, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 18/09/2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18/09/2020 ORDER PER N.R.S. GANESAN:J.M. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE PRESENT APPLICATION UNDER RU LE 24 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES PRAYING RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 22/06/2018. SHRI G. N. PUROHIT, LEA RNED SENIOR COUNSEL FOR M.A.NO.19/JAB/2018(A.Y.2009- 10) 2 NEELIM A SINGH VS ITO THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CAL LED ON 22/06/2018, HE WAS PRESENT IN THE COURT ROOM HOWEVER, WHEN THE CAS E WAS CALLED HE COULD NOT HEAR AND THE CASE WAS HEARD. THEREFORE, HE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE IN NOT REPRESENTING THE APPEAL. T HE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS REFERRED VARIOUS CASE LAWS INCLUDI NG THE JUDGMENT OF THE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. S. CHENNIAPPA MUDALIAR [1969] 74 ITR 41 (SC) AND SUBMI TTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS NO POWER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON -PROSECUTION. ACCORDINGLY, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE S UBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL OUGHT TO HAVE DISPOSED OF THE APPEAL ON ME RIT IRRESPECTIVE OF THE FACT WHETHER THE ASSESSEE OR THE DEPARTMENT APPEARE D BEFORE IT OR NOT. SHRI S. K. HALDAR LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATI VE ALSO VERY FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL MAY BE HEARD ON MERIT. 2. HAVING HEARD THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E AND THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS TH AT IT IS NO MORE RES INTEGRA THAT I.T.A.T. HAS NO POWER TO DISMISS THE A PPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION. EVEN THOUGH RULE 24 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES WAS AMENDED BY INCORPORATING PROVISO THERETO BUT VARIOUS HIGH COURTS IN THE COUNTRY HAVE HELD THAT THE TRIBUNAL H AS NO POWER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION. THEREFORE, THE APP EAL OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN DISPOSED OF ON MERIT. ADMITTEDLY, THE MERIT OF THE APPEAL WAS NOT CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL THEREFORE, THE APPEAL NE EDS TO BE RESTORED ON FILE FOR HEARING ON MERIT. ACCORDINGLY, IN EXERCIS E OF THE POWER CONFERRED ON THIS TRIBUNAL UNDER PROVISO TO RULE 24(2) OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 22/ 06/2018 IS HEREBY RECALLED. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I.T.A. NO. 13/JAB/2018 STANDS M.A.NO.19/JAB/2018(A.Y.2009- 10) 3 NEELIM A SINGH VS ITO RESTORED ON THE FILE OF THIS TRIBUNAL. THE REGIST RY IS DIRECTED TO POST THE APPEAL FOR FINAL HEARING ON 02/11/2020. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSE SSEE STANDS ALLOWED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED ON SEPTEMBER 18 TH , 2020 IN VIRTUAL COURT . SD/- SD/- (SANJAY ARORA) (N.R.S.GANESAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:18/09/2020 *SINGH //TRUE COPY//