M/s PGF Limited, Chandigarh V. ACIT (TDS), Chandigarh

MA 28/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0521 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 1997-1998
• Appeal Filed On: 27-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: RAKESH MARWAHA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause; Bonafide mistake

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH B , CHANDIGARH , !'# , #$ % & ' ( , )*' BEFORE: SMT.DIVA SINGH, JM & SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A M MA NOS.28 TO 36/CHD/2018 IN . / ITA NOS.641 TO 649/CHD/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEARS :1997-98 TO 2005-06 ) M/S PGF LIMITED, SCO 1042-43, SECTOR 22-B, CHANDIGARH. THE A.C.I.T.(TDS), CHANDIGARH. ./ PAN:AABCP2805N /APPELLANT /RESPONDENT !' /ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI ASHOK GOYAL, CA RAKESH MARWAHA, CA ' / REVENUE BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH, SR. DR #! $ % /DATE OF HEARING : 30.11.2018 &'()! $ /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:30.11.2018 )+ /ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M . : ALL THE ABOVE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS ARE FILED BY THE APPLICANT FOR RECALLING OF THE CONSOLIDATED ORD ER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 8.6.2017 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR S 1997-98 TO 2005-06, WHICH WERE DISMISSED EX-PARTE F OR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 2. THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED THAT THE REASON FOR NOT ATTENDING THE HEARING ON 8.6.2017 WAS THAT THE COUN SEL SHRI KUMAR PUSHPARAJ, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT RECEIVED THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE DATE OF HEARING BUT FORGOT T O 2 NOTE DOWN THE SAME IN HIS DIARY AND KEPT THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IN HIS DRAWER AND, THEREFORE, THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL COULD NOT BE ATTENDED. THAT O NLY ON RECEIPT OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL REQUISITE INQU IRY WAS MADE FROM SH. PUSHPARAJ ABOUT THE REASON FOR NON- APPEARANCE ON 08-06-2017 AND THEN IT WAS LEARNT THA T THE HEARING OF THE SAID DATE REMAINED UNATTENDED DUE TO AN INADVERTENT/BONAFIDE MISTAKE. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE DEFECTS POINTED OUT BY THE REGIST RY WERE REPLIED VIDE LETTER DATED 27.9.2017. IN THIS REGARD, AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE COUNSEL SHRI KU MAR PUSHPARAJ AND THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY SHRI NEERAJ KUMAR BIRDI, STATING THE ABOVE FACTS ON OATH WERE FILED BEFORE US. 3. THE LD. DR DID NOT CONTROVERT THE SAME. 4. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ENTIRE FACTS OF THE CAS E. WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT REASON FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIB UNAL ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING TO PROSECUTE THE APPE AL. WE ARE THEREFORE OF THE OPINION THAT TO MEET THE ENDS OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN A REA SONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. EXERCISING THE POWER OF THE TRIBUNAL PROVIDED IN THE PROVISO TO RULES 24 AND 25 OF THE ITAT RULES 1963, TO SET ASIDE AN EX-PARTE ORDER AND RESTORE THE APPEAL IN CASE WHERE AN ASSESSEE DEMONS TRATES REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE, AND CONSIDERIN G THE ENTIRETY OF FACTS IN THE PRESENT CASE, WE ARE OF TH E VIEW THAT THIS IS A FIT CASE FOR RECALLING THE ORDER FOR FRESH 3 HEARING, WHICH WE HEREBY DO. THE REGISTRY IS DIRE CTED TO FIX THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL ON 23.1.2019, WHICH W AS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT. NO SEPARATE NOTICE BE ISS UED TO THE PARTIES. FURTHER, SINCE THE DEFECTS HAD BEEN ADDRESSED AFTER THE DISMISSAL OF THE APPEALS THE SA ME ARE OF NO CONSEQUENCE AND THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO R EMOVE THE DEFECTS AS POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY AFRESH. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION S FILED BY THE APPLICANT ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- $ %' & ( (DIVA SINGH) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) ,' / JUDICIAL MEMBER )*' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $ /DATED: 30 TH NOVEMBER, 2018 * * '*!+,-,! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. .! % / CIT 4. .! % ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. ,/0 !1 , $ 1 , 23405 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 046# / GUARD FILE '* % / BY ORDER, 7 / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR