Kotari Srinivasa Rao, , Undrajavaram Mandalam V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Tanuku

MA 28/VIZ/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0861 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 12-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 29-09-2022
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 11-08-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलȣयअͬधकरण, ͪवशाखापटणम पीठ, ͪवशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM Įी दुåवूǽ आर एल रेɬडी, ÛयाǓयक सदèय एवं Įी एस बालाकृçणन, लेखा सदèय के सम¢ BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.No. 28/Viz/2022 (In आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.335/Viz/2019) (Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year :2014-15) Kotari Srinivasa Rao, D.No. 1-91, Canal Road, Velivennu, Undrajavaram Mandal, West Godavari Dist. PAN: APJPK 9870 N Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Tanuku. (अपीलाथȸ/ Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/ Respondent) अपीलाथȸ कȧ ओर से/ Appellant by : Ms. K. Hemalatha, CA Ĥ×याथȸ कȧ ओर से / Respondent by : Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. AR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख / Date of Hearing : 30/09/2022 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 13/10/2022 O R D E R PER S. BALAKRISHNAN, Accountant Member : This Miscellaneous Application is filed by the assessee seeking recall of the order passed by the Tribunal in ITA No. 335/Viz/2019, dated 28/06/2022. 2 2. At the outset, the Ld. Authorized Representative [Ld. AR] submitted that vide the order of the Tribunal dated 28/06/2022, the ITAT passed exparte order and dismissed the assessee’s appeal in ITA No. 335/Viz/2019 for the AY 2014-15. In this regard, the Ld. AR brought our attention to the contents of the Miscellaneous Petition filed by the assessee dated 12/08/2022 wherein the assessee explained the reasons for non-appearance before the ITAT on the date of hearing of the appeal ie on 02/06/2022 which reads as under: “1........ 2. In this regard, it is submitted that the authorized representative of the assessee is based at Hyderabad and the assessee was under the impression that the case hearings are being taken care by him. 3. Whereas, when the case was posted on 2/6/2022, the Counsel before the date of hearing telephoned the undersigned and infor med that since he was suffering from back ache, he is unable to travel to Visakhapatnam. However, the Counsel fur ther infor med that he would seek adjournment and also advised that pe titioner may have to look for an al ternative Counsel to pursue the case. 4. In the meanwhile, as I understand that there was no representation on the designated date, because of which the Hon’ble Bench dismissed the appeal by observing that the assessee is no t interested in pursuing the case. 5. Vide this pe tition it is prayed that the assessee’s intention is to cooperate and get the case co mpleted but could not do so for the reason that assessee’s counsel was unwell due to back ache. 3 6. Considering the facts and circumstances the Hon’ble Bench is requested to recall the order and vide this pe tition the assessee affir ms that there will not be such kind of failure if the Hon’ble Bench is pleased to recall the order and post the case for hearing.” 3. Therefore, the Ld. AR pleaded that the appeal may be restored and one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee to pursue his appeal effectively otherwise great hardship and insufferable injustice will be inflicted to the assessee. 4. On the other hand the Ld. DR relied on the order of the Tribunal. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record and the order of the Tribunal dated 28/06/2022 (supra). At the time of hearing of the appeal none appeared on behalf of the assessee and therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the material available on record, the Tribunal passed ex-parte order and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. On perusal of the cogent reasons explained by the assessee (supra) for non-appearance of the Ld. AR of the assessee on the date of hearing of the appeal, we are of the considered view that there is a sufficient and 4 reasonable cause that prevented the assessee for non-appearing before the Tribunal at the time of hearing of the appeal. Therefore, considering the prayer of the Ld. AR as well as strictly following the principles of natural justice, we hereby recall the order of the Tribunal dated 28/06/2022 and post the appeal for hearing on 21/11/2022. Since the date of the hearing of the appeal announced in the open court in the presence of both the Counsels, no separate notice will be issued with respect to date of hearing of the appeal. Ld. Counsels are hereby informed to file the paper books, if any, well in advance. It is ordered accordingly. 6. In the result, MA filed by the assessee is allowed. Pronounced in the open Court on the 13 th October, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (दुåवूǽ आर.एल रेɬडी) (एस बालाकृçणन) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) (S.BALAKRISHNAN) ÛयाǓयकसदèय/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated :13.10.2022 OKK - SPS 5 आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. Ǔनधा[ǐरती/ The Assessee – Kotari Srinivasa Rao, D.No. 1-91, Canal Road, Velivennu, Undrajavaram Mandal, West Godavari Dist. 2. राजèव/The Revenue – Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Aayakar Bhavan, Sajjapuram, Tanuku, Andhra Pradesh – 534211. 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajahmundry. 4. आयकर आयुÈत (अपील)/ The Commissioner of Income Tax 5. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, ͪवशाखापटणम/ DR, ITAT, Visakhapatnam 6. गाड[ फ़ाईल / Guard file आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam