, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . ,%& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 242/MDS/2016 [ IN I.T.A. NO. 1469/MDS/2016] ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 M/S. VENTURE METAL PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., JALEEL PALACE, 3 RD FLOOR, 69, ELDAMS ROAD, TEYNAMPET, CHENNAI 6000018. PAN: AAEFV5234F V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE WARD 3 (2), CHENNAI. ( APPLICANT) (()*+ / RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI M. KARUNAKARAN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAL, JCIT -.% / DATE OF HEARING : 13.01.2017 -.% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.01.2017 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE ASSESSEE FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETI TION PRAYING FOR RECALLING THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DA TED 09.08.2016. 2 M.A. NO. 242/MDS/2016 2. SHRI M. KARUNAKARAN, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE AS SESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED THE NOTICE ISS UED BY THIS TRIBUNAL. HOWEVER, THE SAME WAS MISPLACED. HENCE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT CONTACT THE ADVOCATE. THEREFORE, THE ASS ESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, NON APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL , WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING IS NEITHER WILLFUL NOR WANTON. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT AN OPPO RTUNITY MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE FOR ARGUING THE CASE BEFORE T HIS TRIBUNAL ON MERIT. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, SHIR SUPRIYAPAL, THE LD. DEPART MENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO REASONABL E CAUSE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON 09.08.2016, WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARIN G. THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 09.08.2016 NEED NO T BE RECALLED. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITH ER SIDE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ADMITTED LY, THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THIS TRIBUNAL WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE NOW CLAIMS THAT THE NOTICE RECEIVED FROM THIS TRIBU NAL WAS MISPLACED. THEREFORE, HE COULD NOT CONTACT THE ADV OCATE. THIS 3 M.A. NO. 242/MDS/2016 TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT MISPLACI NG OF NOTICE OF HEARING IS HUMAN ERROR. IT MAY HAPPEN TO ANYONE. THEREFORE, GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO ARGU E THE CASE ON MERIT BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL MAY NOT PREJUDICE THE IN TEREST OF THE REVENUE IN ANY WAY. IN OUR OPINION GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR ARGUING THE CASE ON MERIT BEFORE T HIS TRIBUNAL WOULD DEFINITELY PROMOTE THE CAUSE OF JUSTICE. TH IS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE FAILURE OF THE ASSE SSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON 09.08.2016, WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING IS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE IN EXERCISE OF THE POWERS CONFERRED ON THIS TRIBUNAL U NDER PROVISO TO RULE 24 OF THE INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULE S, 1963, THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 09.08.2016 IS HEREBY R ECALLED. 5. NOW THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.1469/MD S/2016 STANDS RESTORED ON THE FILE OF THIS TRIBUNAL. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO POST THE APPEAL FOR FINAL DISPOSAL ON 08.03.2017 . SINCE, THE DATE OF NEXT HEARING IS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT, IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES, IT MAY NOT BE NECESSARY FOR THE R EGISTRY TO ISSUE NOTICE OF HEARING FOR HEARING ON 08.03.2017. IN O THER WORDS, COPY OF THIS ORDER SHALL BE TREATED AS NOTICE OF HEARING . 4 M.A. NO. 242/MDS/2016 6. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION THE MISCELLANEOUS PET ITION OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13 TH JANUARY, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, / DATED, THE 13 TH JANUARY, 2017. JR. /COPY TO: 1. APPLICANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ( )/CIT(A) 4. /CIT, 5. /DR 6. /GF.