आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी वी दुगाŊ राव Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी जी. मंजुनाथा, लेखा सद˟ के समƗ Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member M.P. No. 272/Chny/2019 [In I.T.A. No.1646/Chny/2019] Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Plaza Realities, Plaza House, No. 5, Thirumurthy Street, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [PAN: AAIFP3644F] Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai-600 034. (Petitioner) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) Petitioner by : Shri Tarun, Advocate for Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 29.07.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 03.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: By means of present Miscellaneous Petition, the assessee seeks to recall the order passed by the Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 1646/Chny/2019 dated 01.10.2019 for the assessment year 2009-10. By referring to the miscellaneous petition, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the Tribunal has passed the order partly allowing the appeal of the Revenue and restored the entire issue to file of the Assessing Officer to re-examine the issue afresh in accordance with law. The Tribunal M.P. No.272/Chny/19 2 concluded the appeal order without any representation from the petitioner since the ld. Counsel for the assessee could not put his appearance on the day of hearing due to the reasons beyond his control and prayed for recalling order of the Tribunal for fresh adjudication by affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. 3. The ld. DR has submitted that by considering all material facts available on record, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to re- examine and decide the issue afresh in accordance with after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 4. We have heard both the sides and perused the order passed by the Tribunal. Despite the hearing of the appeal filed by the Revenue has been notified by the Tribunal, the petitioner assessee has not put his appearance or filed any adjournment petition filed. Hence, the Tribunal proceeded to decide the appeal filed by the Revenue on merits after hearing the ld. DR and by considering the materials available on record. Since, during the course of appellate proceedings, the petitioner filed the return of income of Shri Suresh Veeraswami, wherein, he has admitted capital gains and the balance was claimed to have been owned by the others in connection with the Perungudi land of 2.35 acres, without calling for remand report from the Assessing Officer, the ld. CIT(A) allowed the M.P. No.272/Chny/19 3 claim of the assessee was in violation of the provisions of Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly remitted the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to re-examine the matter in the light of the material that was filed before the ld. CIT(A) and decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Thus, we find no mistake apparent on record warranting recall of the order of the Tribunal. 5. In the result, the MP filed by the petitioner is dismissed. Order pronounced on 03 rd August, 2022 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (G. MANJUNATHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 03.08.2022 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ (अपील)/CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 6. गाडŊ फाईल/GF.