Shri J.Sudhakar, Kovilpatti V. ITO, Tuticorin

MA 197/CHNY/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7131 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-11-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 18-11-2011
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 14-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A C JOSEPH IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: S R JAYARAMAN F

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI D BENCH, CHENNAI. BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO. 197/MDS/2010 [IN I.T.A. NO. 195/MDS/2009] ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 SHRI J. SUDHAKAR, 17E, JOTHI NAGAR II STREET, KOVILPATTI 628 501. [PAN: AWQPS6699M] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I (3), TUTICORIN. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.R. JAYARAMAN, F.C.A. REVENUE BY : SHRI A.C. JOSEPH, I.R.S., (JCIT) DATE OF HEARING : 1 8 . 1 1 . 2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18.11.2011 ORDER PER HARI OM MARATHA, J.M. THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL D SMC BENCH IN ITA NO. 195/MDS/2009 DATED 30.09.2009 IN THE CASE O F SHRI J. SUDHAKAR FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 30.09.2009 HAS NOT CONDONED THE DELAY OF 150 DAYS IN FILING TH E APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, ALL THE EVENTS RESULTING TO THIS DELAY OF 150 DAYS HAS BEEN CHRONOLOGICALLY DETAILED IN THE PETITION WITH THE PRAYER THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND HAVE CONSIDERE D THE RIVAL STANDS. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THERE IS NO M ISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE M.P. M.P. M.P. M.P. NO. NO. NO. NO.197 197197 197/ // /MDS/ MDS/ MDS/ MDS/11 1111 11 2 RECORD RECTIFIABLE UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT. UNDER THIS SECTION, WE CANNOT RECALL THE ORDER WITH THE INTENTION TO REVIE W THE SAME. THE SMC BENCH HAS DECIDED THE PETITION OF CONDONATION OF DE LAY BY PASSING A DETAILED ORDER AND HAS NOT FOUND THAT THE APPEAL IS MAINTAIN ABLE. THE ONLY COURSE OPEN BEFORE THE PETITIONER IS TO FILE APPEAL AGAINS T THE ORDER IN QUESTION AND THE SAME CANNOT BE RECALLED BY US AS WE ARE NOT PER MITTED TO DO SO IN THE GIVEN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. ACCORDIN GLY, THIS PETITION STANDS DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18.11.2011. SD/ - SD/ - (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) VICE PRESIDENT (HARI OM MARATHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 18.11.2011 VM/- TO: THE ASSESSEE//A.O./CIT(A)/CIT/D.R.