Balli Durga Prasada Rao, Venkatagiri V. ITO, Ward-1, Gudur

MA 239/HYD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7788 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 30-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B V PRASAD REDDY
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO. 239/HYD/2011 IN MA NO. 178/HYD/2011 ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS. 826-839/HYD/2007 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2000-01 TO 2004-05) SHRI BALLI DURGA PRASAD RAO, VENKATAGIRI PAN: AJNPB0650R VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 GUDURU (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY: SHRI SAMUEL NAGADESI RESPONDENT BY: SHRI B.V. PRASAD REDDY DATE OF HEARING: 2 4 .0 2 .2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 24.02.2012 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: BY THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE SE EKS RECALL OF THE EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN M.A. NO. 178/HYD/2011 ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS. 826 TO 839/HYD /2007 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2000-01 TO 2004-05. 2. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT THE ABOVE APPEALS WERE DISMISSED VIDE ORDER DATED 16.8. 2010 FOR NON-APPEARANCE AND NON PROSECUTION. THE ASSESSEE F ILED A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 178/HYD/2011 SEEKING RESTORATION OF THE APPEALS. AS PER THE NOTICE SENT BY THE TRIBUNAL THE SAID MA WAS POSTED FOR HEARING ON 7.10 .2011. HOWEVER, THE TRIBUNAL DISPOSED OF THE MA EX-PARTE O N 4.10.2011. AS THE CHANGE IN THE DATE OF HEARING CO ULD NOT BE TAKEN NOTE OF BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE COULD N OT BE REPRESENTED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE LEARNED COUNS EL FOR THE M.A. NO. 239/HYD/2011 SHRI BALLI DURGA PRASAD RAO ==================== 2 ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE NON-APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING IS NOT WILFUL OR WANTON AND THE ASS ESSEE IS VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS APPEAL. AC CORDINGLY, THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE PRAYED THE BENCH TO PR OVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTEND THE CASE ON MERIT. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS NO SERIOUS OBJECTION FOR RECALLI NG THE EX- PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE ARE OF THE OP INION THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY A REASONABLE CAUSE IN REPRESENTING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WE, THEREFORE, A RE INCLINED TO RECALL THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN M.A . NO. 178/HYD/2011 DATED 4.10.2011 AND THE APPEALS IN ITA NOS. 826 TO 830/HYD/2007 FOR A.YS. 2000-01 TO 2004-05 IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ARE RESTORED ON THE FILE OF TH E TRIBUNAL. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO POST THE APPEALS FOR HE ARING ON 4.6.2012. NO NOTICE OF HEARING SHALL BE SERVED ON BOTH THE PARTIES AS THIS ORDER ITSELF WOULD SERVE AS NOTICE OF HEARING. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 24 TH FEBRUARY, 2012. SD/ - (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/ - (CHANDRA POOJARI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED THE 24 TH FEBRUARY, 2012. M.A. NO. 239/HYD/2011 SHRI BALLI DURGA PRASAD RAO ==================== 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. S HRI BALLI DURGA PRASADA RAO, EX - MLA, C/O. SHRI SAMUEL NAGADESI, CHARERED ACCOUNTANT, 302, GOLDEN GREEN APARTMENTS, ERRA MANZIL COLONY, PUNJAGUTTA, HYDERABAD-82. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GUDUR 3. THE CIT(A), GUNTUR 4. THE CIT, GUNTUR CHARGE, GUNTUR 5. THE DR B BENCH, ITAT, HYDERABAD TPRAO