W Diamant (India) Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

MA 277/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8027 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-05-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 23-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SRUJANI MOHANTY
• Assessee Lawyers: CHANDRA KANT G DOSHI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : FRIDAY NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO. 277/DEL/2011 (IN ITA NO. 5845/D/10) ASSTT. YEAR 2007-08 M/S. DIAMANT (INDIA) LTD., 13,ABDUL FAZAL ROAD, BENGALI MARKET, NEW DELHI. VS. DY. CIT, CIRCLE 18 (1) NEW DELHI. APPELLANT BY: SHRI CHANDRA KANT G. DOSHI, CA RESPONDENT BY: SMT. SRUJANI MOHANTY, SR. DR ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV, JM : THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS DIRECTED AT THE INSTANCE OF ASSESSEE CONTENDING THEREIN THAT ITS APPEAL WAS DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL ON 24 TH FEBRUARY, 2011 FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. LD. COUNSE L FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT MANAGING DIRECTOR OF TH E ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS APPOINTED THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT TO R EPRESENT THE ASSESSEE ON 20 TH FEBRUARY, 2011. THE POWER OF ATTORNEY WAS SIGNED A T MA NO. 277/DEL/11 2 PUNE AND THE PAPERS WERE HANDED OVER AT PUNE. LD. T AX CONSULTANT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS OF THE VIEW THAT SOME MORE PAPERS ARE REQUIRED FOR DEFENDING THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THEREFO RE, AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS MOVED WHICH WAS REJECTED BY THE TRI BUNAL ON THE GROUND THAT NO REASONS ARE DISCLOSED IN THE APPLICATION FO R TAKING ADJOURNMENT. HE SUBMITTED THAT IT IS JUST A COMMUNICATION ERROR BECAUSE SPECIFICALLY THE NON AVAILABILITY OF PAPERS ETC. COULD NOT BE PO INTED OUT IN THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION, BUT ASSESSEE IS VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. HE PREYED THAT ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL BE RECALLED AND APPEAL BE HEARD ON MERIT. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD . DR OPPOSED THE PRAYER OF ASSESSEE AND SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE SHOU LD BE VIGILANT IN CONDUCTING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 2. ON DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTAN CES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ASSESSEE HAS BEEN PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT REASONS FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE WHEN ITS APPEAL WAS LISTED. ITS COUNSEL REMAINED UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT COMPLETE DOCUMENTS ARE NOT AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE FOR DEFENDING IT AN D, THEREFORE, ADJOURNMENT WOULD BE GRANTED MERELY ON ASKING. CONS IDERING ALL THESE ASPECTS, WE ALLOW THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, RE CALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 24.2.2011, RESTORE THE APPEAL TO ITS ORIGINAL NUMBER AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO FIX IT FOR HEARING ON 10 TH JULY, 2012. THIS DATE HAS BEEN DULY PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AND COMMUNIC ATED TO THE LD. MA NO. 277/DEL/11 3 COUNSEL. THEREFORE, NO SEPARATE NOTICE WILL BE SENT TO THE PARTIES ABOUT THE FIXATION OF THE APPEAL. 3. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 4 TH MAY, 2012. SD/- SD/- [SHAMIM YAHYA] [RAJPAL YADAV] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 4.5.2012 VEENA COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT