International Sufi Center, Bangalore V. DIT, Bangalore

MA 24/BANG/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3697 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 11-06-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 01-11-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 25-02-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SWATI S PATIL
• Assessee Lawyers: MANOJ D PUKALE

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.P.NO.24/BANG/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.772/B/10) ASSESSMENT YEAR : NOT APPLICABLE INTERNATIONAL SUFI CENTER, C/O. P.K. SUBRAMANIAN & CO., 1010, 1 ST FLOOR, ABOVE CORPORATION BANK, 26 TH MAIN, 4 TH T BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BANGALOR E- 560 041. : APPLICANT VS. THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE. : RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY : SHRI MANOJ D. PUKALE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. SWATI S. PATIL O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 14.12.2009 IN ITA NO.77 2/B/09 SEEKING RECALL OF THE AFORESAID TRIBUNAL ORDER. 2. IT IS SUBMITTED IN THE PETITION THAT THE CASE WA S ENTRUSTED TO M/S. P.K. SUBRAMANIAN & CO., C.AS. FOR REPRESENTING THE ASSES SEE AND WHEN THE MATTER CAME UP FOR HEARING ON 17.11.2009 FOR THE FI RST TIME, THE CASE WAS M.P. NO.24/BANG/10 PAGE 2 OF 3 ADJOURNED TO 14.12.09. IN THE INTERVENING PERIOD B ETWEEN 17.11.09 AND 14.12.09, THE AR, M/S. P.K. SUBRAMANIAM &CO. WANTED TO APPOINT SRI S. PARATHASARATHI, ADVOCATE TO APPEAR IN THE MATTER AN D ACCORDINGLY A REQUEST FOR VAKALATH IN FAVOUR OF HIM WAS MADE. HOWEVER, O N 14.12.09 THERE WAS NO VAKALATH OF SRI S. PARATHASARATHI, BUT THE EARLI ER VAKALATH WAS ON RECORD, DUE TO WHICH NONE HAD APPEARED DUE TO COMMU NICATION GAP. THE LATTER VAKALATH IS NOW ON RECORD AT ANNEXURE-B. LD . AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS A GOOD CASE ON MERITS CONCERNING THE B ENEFIT OF RECOGNITION U/S. 80G(5) OF THE ACT AND THE ENTIRE ACTIVITIES OF THE PETITIONER TRUST AND ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BE PROVIDED. IT WAS T HEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ORDER DISMISSING THE APPEAL MAY BE RECALLED AND REP OSTED FOR DISPOSAL ON MERITS. 3. THE LD. DR VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. AR. SHE PRAYED THAT THE FLIMSY GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT BE ENTERTAINED AS IT HAMPERS THE PROCEEDINGS UNNECESSA RILY. THE ASSESSEE IS ONLY PROLONGING THE ISSUE AND THE CASE HAS NO MERIT S. SHE ALSO PLACED RELIANCE IN THE CASE OF KESHAVA BHAT V. ITO (2001) 166 CTR (KAR) 420. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. FROM THE REASONS SUBMITTED FOR NON-APPEAR ANCE, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT NON-PROSECUTION OF THE APPEAL WAS FOR A REASON ABLE CAUSE DUE TO COMMUNICATION GAP. WE THEREFORE RECALL THE ORDER O F THE TRIBUNAL DATED 17.12.09 AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO POST THE CASE F OR HEARING IN THE NORMAL COURSE. M.P. NO.24/BANG/10 PAGE 3 OF 3 PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 11 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2010. SD/- SD/- ( SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R BANGALORE, DATED, THE 11 TH JUNE, 2010. DS/- COPY TO: 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE (1+1) BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, BANGALORE.