Rameysh Ramdas, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

MA 249/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5535 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 11-08-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: N P VIJAY KUMAR

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI ... , . !' , # $ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER %% / M.P. NO.249/MDS/2017 (IN I.T.A. NO.1399/MDS/2017) & '& / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 SHRI RAMYESH RAMDAS, OLD NO.32, NEW NO.59, KALAKSHETRA COLONY, MGR ROAD, CHENNAI - 600 090. PAN : BGRPR 7856 P V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -2(1), CHENNAI - 600 006. ()*& /PETITIONER) ()+*,/ RESPONDENT) )*& . / /PETITIONER BY : SHRI N.P. VIJAY KUMAR, ADVOC ATE )+*, . / / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT 0 . 1# / DATE OF HEARING : 27.10.2017 2!' . 1# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.10.2017 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETITION PRAYING FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DA TED 03.08.2017. 2. SHRI N.P. VIJAY KUMAR, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE AS SESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL WAS POSTED FOR HEARING ON 03.08.2017. THE ASSESSEE FILED A LETTER BEFORE THE REGISTRY ON 02.08.2017 2 M.P. NO.249/MDS/17 PRAYING FOR ADJOURNMENT. THE SAID LETTER WAS NOT PL ACED BEFORE THE BENCH. CONSEQUENTLY, THE APPEAL WAS DISPOSED FOR N ON- PROSECUTION ON 03.08.2017. ACCORDING TO THE LD. CO UNSEL, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED THE APPEAL AFTER CONSULTATION WI TH CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT AND HE WAS IN THE PROCESS OF APPOINTING A COUNSEL FOR ARGUING THE CASE. HENCE, THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED FO R ADJOURNMENT. HOWEVER, THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PLACED BEFORE THE BENCH. HENCE, THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT . THEREFORE, THE LD.COUNSEL PRAYED THAT AN OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GIVEN TO ARGUE THE CASE ON MERIT. 3. WE HEARD SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, THE LD. DEPARTM ENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE CONSULTED HIS CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT AND ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF NOMINATING A COUNSEL FOR ARGUING THE CASE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED AN ADJOURNMENT PETI TION ON 02.08.2017 BEFORE THE REGISTRY. UNFORTUNATELY, THE SAME WAS NOT PLACED BEFORE THE BENCH ON 03.08.2017 WHEN THE APPE AL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 4. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS UNDER THE BONAFIDE IMPRESSION THAT THE APPEAL W ILL BE ADJOURNED 3 M.P. NO.249/MDS/17 ON THE BASIS OF HIS APPLICATION FILED ON 02.08.2017 . THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED FROM SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NO T APPEARING ON 03.08.2017 BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HENCE, IN EXERCISE OF POWER CONFERRED ON THIS TRIBUNAL UNDER PROVISO TO RULE 24 OF INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963, THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 03.08.2017 IN I.T.A. NO.1399/MDS/2017 STANDS RESTOR ED ON THE FILE OF THIS TRIBUNAL. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO POST THE APPEAL FOR FINAL DISPOSAL ON 19.12.2017. SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING IS ANNOUNCED IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES, IT MAY NOT BE NEC ESSARY FOR THE REGISTRY TO ISSUE A SEPARATE NOTICE OF HEARING. IN OTHER WORDS, A COPY OF THIS ORDER SHALL BE TREATED AS NOTICE OF HE ARING FOR 19.12.2017. 5. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THE MISCELLANEOUS PE TITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH OCTOBER, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !' ) ( ... ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 27 TH OCTOBER, 2017. KRI. 4 M.P. NO.249/MDS/17 . )15% 6%'1 /COPY TO: 1. )*& / PETITIONER 2. )+*, /RESPONDENT 3. 0 71 () /CIT(A) 4. 0 71 /CIT 5. %8 )1 /DR 6. 9& : /GF.