Inspecting Assistant Commissioner ,Vijayalakshmi V, Palakkad V. The ACIt-TDS, Ghaziabad

MA 20/COCH/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8648 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 10-01-2020
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 20-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRITUNJAYA SHARMA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; TDS
• Section: 20

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFOR E S/ SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI , AM & GEORGE GEORGE K., J M M.P. NO. 2 0 /COCH/2019 (ARISING OUT OF IT A NO. 538/ COCH/2018) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2016 - 17(4 TH QTR ) S MT. VIJAYALAKSHMI V. , INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, O/O T HE INSPECTING ASST. COMMISSIONER, PALAKKAD - 678 001. CHN IO 0771B] VS. THE INCOME - TAX OFFICER (TDS) E NGLISH CHURCH ROAD, PALAKKAD - 678 001. ( REVENUE - APPELLANT) (ASSESSEE - RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SHRI MRITUNJAYA SHARMA, SR. DR D ATE OF HEARING 10/01/20 20 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 10/01/20 20 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: BY TH IS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, THE ASSESSEE IS SEEKING RECALL OF THE E X PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.53 8/COC H/2 018 DATED 16 TH JANUARY, 2019. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF TH IS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR 3. IN THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION S , THE ASSESSEE HAS PLEADED AS FOLLOWS: M.P. NO . 2 0 / COC H/ 2019 2 1. THE AB OVE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED BY THIS HONBLE TRIBUNAL BY ORDER DATED 16.01.2019 ON THE GROUND THAT AT THE TIME OF HEARING NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE EVEN THOUGH THE NOTICES HAD BEEN SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE . IT IS FURTHER STATED THAT THERE WAS NO A DJOURNMENT PETITION RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSEE. 2, IN THIS CONNECTION, IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT UPON RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE, SAME WAS COMMUNICATED TO THE OFFICE OF OUR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AT PALAKKAD. IT IS UNDERSTOOD FROM THE OFFICE OF THE REPRESENTATIVE THAT THEY HAD SOUGHT AN ADJOURNMENT ON 14.01.2019 AND A COPY OF THE EVIDENCE FOR THE SAME IS ENCLOSED. IT WAS UNDER THE SAID CIRCUMSTANCES, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER ON THE HEARING DATE. IN TH IS CONNECTION, IT IS RESPECTFU LLY SUBMITTED THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO WILLFUL OR INTENTIONAL OMISSION ON THE PART OF THE PETITIONER HEREIN. IF THE DELAY IS NOT CONDONED AND THE APPEAL IS NOT RESTORED AND ADJUDICATED ON MERITS, IT WOULD CAUSE SERIOUS AND IRREPARABLE HARDSHIP, PREJUDICE A ND MONETARY LOSS TO THE PETITIONER 3 . IN THE ABOVE CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE PETITIONER IS ADVISED TO MAKE THIS PETITION FOR RESTORATION WITH A PRAYER THAT THE APPEAL MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL. IT IS ALSO HUMBLY PRAYED THAT THE PETITIONER MAY BE AFFORDED A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND TO MAKE REPRESENTATION. THIS HONBLE TRIBUNAL MAY KINDLY BE PLEASED TO GRANT THE ABOVE PRAYER AND RENDER JUSTICE. 4. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE L ETTER FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS NOT FILED BY THE DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AS MENTIONED IN THE PETITION, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION MAY NOT BE ENTERTAINED. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND GONE THROUGH THE MISCELLANEOUS P ETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE F OR RECALLING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNA L . IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE SUBMISSION OF THE PETITIONER IS THAT THE ASSESSEES AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HAD SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT OF THE APPEAL VIDE LETTER DATED 14/01/2019 AND TO THIS EFFECT, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A C OPY OF THE ADJOURNMENT LETTER FROM SMT. VIJAYALAKSHMI V., M.P. NO . 2 0 / COC H/ 2019 3 INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, O/O THE INSPECTING ASST. COMMISSIONER, PALAKKAD - 678 001. HOWEVER, THE ADJOURNMENT LETTER IS NOT ACCOMPANIED BY A LETTER OF DELEGATION OF POWER GIVEN TO H ER . 5.1 AS PER RULE 16 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, WHERE THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL IS SIGNED BY AN AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, THE ASSESSEE SHALL APPEND TO THE MEMORANDUM OF DOCUMENT AUTHORIZING THE REPRESENTATIVE TO APPEAR FOR THE ASSESSEE AS REQUIRED UNDER THIS RULE. IF THE REPRESENTATIVE IS A REGULAR EMPLOYEE OF THE ASSESSEE, THE DOCUMENT SHALL STATE THE CAPACITY IN WHICH HE IS EMPLOYED. THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL SHALL, UNLESS THE DOCUMENT HAS BEEN APPENDED EARLIER, FILE SUCH DOCUMENT BEFORE THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE HEARING. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THERE IS NO COMPLIANCE OF THIS REQUIREMENT EVEN AT THE STAGE OF FILING OF THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. HEN CE, WE ARE INCLINED TO DISMISS THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10 TH JANUARY, 2020. SD/ - SD/ - (GEORGE GEORGE K.) (CHANDRA POOJARI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE: KOCHI DATED: 10 TH JANUARY, 2020 GJ COPY TO: M.P. NO . 2 0 / COC H/ 2019 4 1 . SMT. VIJAYALAKSHMI V., INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, O/O T HE INSPECTING ASST. COMMISSIONER, PALAKKAD - 678 001. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS), ENGLISH CHU RCH ROAD, PALAKKAD - 678 001. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS), THRISSUR. 4 . THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, TDS, KO CHI. 5 . D. R., I.T.A.T., COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN. 6 . GUARD FILE. BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) I.T.A.T., COCHIN