M/s. Alankar Jewellers, Surat V. The ACIT., Range-9, Surat

MA 232/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7339 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 09-12-2011
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 26-10-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VINOD TANWANIDR

Judgement Text

, , , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH D AHMEDABAD .., ! ! ! ! ..'#, $ BEFORE SHRI D.K.TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER % % & (MISC. APPLICATION) NO.232 /AHD/2010 & ' (' / ASSESSMENT YEAR:- 2003-04 M/S. ALANKAR JEWELLERS, 4 TO 6, SHANTIVAN APARTMENT, LAMBE HANUMAN ROAD, SURAT PAN NO.AADHA0363F & & & & / V/S . ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RANGE-9, AAYKAR BHAVAN, MAJURA GATE, SURAT (ORIGINAL APPELLANT) (ORIGINAL RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) *+/ BY APPELLANT SHRI CHIRAG SHAH, AR ,*+ - . / BY RESPONDENT SHRI VINOD TANWANI, DR /& 0 - 1$ / DATE OF HEARING 09-12-2011 2'( - 1$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 09-12-2011 3 3 3 3 / / / / ORDER ..'#, $ /PER A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION (MA) IS FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE REQUESTING FOR RECALL OF EX PARTE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 10-03-2 010. IT WAS SUBMITTED IN THE MA THAT THE ASSESSEES BUSINESS WERE CLOSED SINCE D ECEMBER, 2003 AND ACCOUNTANT HAS LEFT THE JOB AND THEREFORE, IT WAS D IFFICULT TO PROVIDE THE DETAILS REQUIRED BY THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE FROM-TIME-TO-TIM E. IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THIS BEING THE FACTUAL MATTER RELATING TO SURVEY PR OCEEDINGS, MORE TIME WAS REQUIRED IN FURNISHING THE REQUIRED DETAILS AND FOR THIS REASON, ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT BEFORE TRIBUNAL BUT ADJOURNMENT WAS NOT ALLOWED AND THE APPEAL WAS DECIDED EX PARTE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT UNDER T HESE FACTS, THIS EX PARTE MA NO.232/AHD/2010 M/S. ALANKAR JEWELLERS V. ACIT RNG-9 SRT PAGE 2 ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL SHOULD BE RECALLED FOR AND TH E APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE DECIDED ON MERIT AFTER HEARING BOTH SIDES . IN THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE US, LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SAM E CONTENTIONS AND HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER IS RE-CALLED, THEN THE ASSESSEE WILL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT AND WILL FILE THE REQUIRED DET AILS AND PAPER BOOK WELL IN ADVANCE. 2. LD DR OF THE REVENUE SUBMITTED THAT MA SHOULD BE DISMISSED BECAUSE THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE TRIBUNAL ORDER. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIN D THAT IT IS NOTED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE IMPUGNED TRIBUNAL ORDER THAT SE VERAL ADJOURNMENTS WERE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE AND HENCE, NO FURTHER ADJOU RNMENT CAN BE ALLOWED BUT EVEN IF ADJOURNMENT WAS NOT ALLOWED TO THE ASSE SSEE, THE APPEAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN DECIDED ON MERIT ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL S AVAILABLE ON RECORD BUT THIS WAS NOT DONE AND HENCE, WE FEEL THAT THIS EX P ARTE TRIBUNAL ORDER SHOULD BE RECALLED FOR A DECISION ON MERIT. WE, THEREFORE, RECALL THE EX PARTE TRIBUNAL ORDER AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO FIX THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 23-02-2012. SINCE, THE DATE OF HEARING WAS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPE N COURT, SEPARATE NOTICE FOR HEARING IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED. WE WANT T O MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD FILE THE DETAILS AND PAPER BOOK WEL L IN ADVANCE AND ON THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED AS PER THIS ORDER OR ON ANY S UBSEQUENT DATE, NO ADJOURNMENT SHOULD BE SOUGHT FOR WITHOUT COMPELLING REASONS. 4. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES MA STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE DATE OF HEARING I.E. ON 0 9-12-2011. SD/- SD/- ( ) ($ ) (D.K. TYAGI) (A.K.GA RODIA) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, MA NO.232/AHD/2010 M/S. ALANKAR JEWELLERS V. ACIT RNG-9 SRT PAGE 3 *DKP 3 3 3 3 - -- - , ,, ,1% 1% 1% 1% 6%(1 6%(1 6%(1 6%(1 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. *+ / APPELLANT 2. ,*+ / RESPONDENT 3. !! 1 /: / CONCERNED CIT 4. /:- / CIT (A) 5. % > ,1& , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. ' @A / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ 3 , /TRUE COPY/ B/ !C ,