THE AKOLA URBAN CO OP. BANK LTD, Akola V. ACIT Akola Circle, Akola

MA 22/NAG/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4361 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 15-04-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 01-04-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 08-12-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NARENDRA KANE
• Keywords: Bonafide belief

Judgement Text

IN TH E INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI MUKUL K. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. M.A.NO. 22 /NAG/2015 ( IN ITA NO. 167 /NAG/201 2 : AY : 20 08 - 0 9 ) THE AKOLA URBAN CO - OP BANK LTD., MURTIZAPUR ROAD, AKOLA PAN: AAAAT4082A VS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AKOLA CIRCLE, MURTIZAPUR ROAD, AKOLA (APPLIC ANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY SHRI K.P.DEWANI, A.R. RESPONDENT BY SHRI NARENDRA KANE, D . R . DATE OF HEARING : - 01/04/2016 DATE OF P RON OUNCEMENT: - 15 / 0 4 /2016 O R D E R PER SHRI SHAMIN YAHYA, A.M . BY WAY OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION , THE ASSESSEE SEEKS RECALL OF THE ORDER OF TH E TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 167 /NAG/201 2 IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. AKOLA URBAN CO - OP. BANK LTD., A.Y. 2008 - 09 ORDER DT. 08 /0 2 /201 3 . THE SAID APPEAL WAS DECIDED B Y THE TRIBUNAL EX - PARTY . N OW BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED AS UNDER: - 1. IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE HEARING OF APPEAL BEING ITA NO.167/NAG/2012 WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE E - COURT ON 31/01/2013. THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE HAS BEEN DISPOSED OFF WITHOUT HEARING ASSESSEE BY ORDER DATED 08.02.2013 AND APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE HAS BEEN DISMISSED. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED CROSS OBJECTION IN FORM NO. 36A ON 28/01/2013 BEFORE HONBLE I TAT, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. THE COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE ON SUBMISSION OF FORM NO.36A ENTERTAINED BONAFIDE BELIEF THAT HEARING OF APPEAL ON 31/01/2013 WOULD NOT TAKE PLACE ON THE DATE OF HEARING AS THE APPEAL OF REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTION OF ASSESSEE FOR THE S AME ASSESSMENT YEAR SHALL BE HEARD TOGETHER. THE COUNSEL OF ASSESSEE WAS ALSO OUT OF STATION FOR SOME DOMESTIC WORK IN THE LAST WEEK OF JANUARY 2013. 3. IT IS ON ACCOUNT OF ABOVE FACTUAL POSITION THAT THE HEARING OF APPEAL HAS INADVERTENTLY REMAINED TO BE ATTENDED FROM THE SIDE OF ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT THE APPEAL. 4. THE DISPUTE IN RESPECT TO ADMISSIBILITY OF INTEREST ACCRUED ON NPA WAS COMMON IN APPEAL OF REVENUE AND THAT RAISED IN CROSS - OBJECTION. THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN NOW LEGALLY ADVISED THAT AS IT IS CO MMON DISPUTE IN APPEAL AND CROSS - OBJECTION IT OUGHT TO BE HEARD SIMULTANEOUSLY. 5. THE ASSESSEE IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES HUMBLY PRAYS THAT THE EX - PARTY ORDER PASSED IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE MAY KINDLY BE RECALLED AND BE FIXED FOR HEARING TO BE ADJUDICATED ALONG WITH THE CROSS - OBJECTION FILED BY ASSESSEE ON 28/01/2013. 2 MA NO.22 /NAG/2015 (IN ITA NO. 167 /NAG/201 2 ) A.M.SIR.(MBODKHE,P.S.) 2. AFTER H EARING BOTH THE COUNSEL S AND PERUSAL OF THE RECORD, WE FIND THAT ITAT RULE NO.24 READS AS UNDER : - WHERE, ON THE DAY FIXED FOR HEARING OR ON ANY OTHER DATE TO WHICH THE HEARING MAY BE ADJOURNED, THE APPELLANT DOES NOT APPEAL IN PERSON OR THROUGH AN AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE WHEN THE APPEAL IS CALLED ON FOR HEARING, THE TRIBUNAL MAY DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERITS AFTER HEARING THE RESPONDENT : PROVIDED THAT WHERE AN APPEAL HAS BEEN DIS POSED OF AS PROVIDED ABOVE AND THE APPELLANT APPEARS AFTERWARDS AND SATISFIES THE TRIBUNAL THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR HIS NON - APPEARANCE, WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED ON FOR HEARING, THE TRIBUNAL SHALL MAKE AN ORDER SETTING ASIDE THE EX - PARTE ORDER AND RESTORING THE APPEAL. 3. HAVING EXAMINE D TH AT PRAYER MADE IN THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ON THE ANVIL OF THE ABOVE MENTION ITAT RULE NO.24 AND THE PROVI SO THEREOF, WE ARE O F THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT, THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE NON - ATTENDANCE BY THE ASSESSEE ON TH AT DATE. 4. THE ASSESSEE HAVING FILED A CROSS OBJECTION CAN BE SAID TO BE IN A REASONABLE BELIEF THAT THE RE VENUE APPEAL WILL NOT BE HEARD IN ISOLATION . ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE O F THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT, THERE WAS SUFF ICIENT CAUSE FOR THE NON - ATTENDANCE BY THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE RECALL THE AFORESAID ORDER O N THE BASIS OF AFORESAID RULE NO.24 AND PROVISO THERETO. THE REGISTRY I S DIRECTED TO FIX THE CASE FOR HEARING IN NORMAL COURSE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THIS MISCEL LANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNC ED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 15 TH DAY OF APRIL , 2016. SD/ - SD/ - (MUKUL K. SHRAWAT) ( SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBE R ACCOUNTANT MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: - 15 /04/2016. MANGESH BODKHE/P.S. COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. C. I.T., CONCERNED 4. CIT (APPEALS) - I, NAGPUR. 5. D.R., ITAT, NAGPUR. 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR