M.N.Kannan, Krishnagiri V. DCIT, Salem

MA 298/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6404 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-04-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 13-04-2018
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 31-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: R VISWANATHAN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI . , . , BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER M .P.NO . 2 9 8 / CHNY /2017 [IN I.T. A. NO. 11 1 8 / CHNY /20 17 ] ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011 - 12 SHRI M.N. KANNAN, PLOT NO. 617/618, BHASAVANAPURAM VILLAGE, GOBACHANDRAM, KOTTAMADAGU PANCHAYAT , THALLY POST, KRISHNAGIRI 635 118. [PAN: AFTPK5663D] VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE III, SALEM. ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI R. VISWANATHAN, C.A. / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V.SREENIVASAN , J CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 13 .0 4 .2018 / DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 13 . 0 4 .201 8 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER : BY MEANS OF PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETITION , THE ASSESSEE SEEKS TO REC ALL THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN I.T.A. NO. 1118 /MDS/20 1 7 DATED 27 .0 9 .2017 RELEVA NT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12. BY REFERRING TO THE PETITION, THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDRESS SPECIFIED IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS CORRECT. HOWEVER, NO NOTICE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER WHEN THE APPEAL W AS POSTED FOR HEARING ON M .P. NO . 2 9 8 / CHNY/201 7 2 27.09.2017 AND THEREBY , THE PETITIONER OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE PUT HIS APPEARANCE WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED UP FOR HEARING. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD. COUNSEL PRAYED THAT THE EX - PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL MAY PLEASE BE RECALLED AND THE PETITIONER MAY BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 2. THE LD. DR DID NOT SERIOUSLY OBJECT TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES AND PERUSED THE PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. IN THIS CASE, THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS FIXED ON 27.09.2017 AND NOTICE WAS ACCORDINGLY ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE SAID NOTICE WAS RECEIVED BACK UNSERVED WITH REMARK OF THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES THAT NO SUCH ADDRESSEE AVAILABLE . SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS, IT WAS INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. HOWEVER, LD. COUNSEL HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDRESS SPECIFIED IN THE ORD ER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS CORRECT AND SINCE NO NOTICE OF HEARING HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER, THE PETITIONER OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE COULD NOT PUT HIS APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND PRAYED THAT THE EX - PARTE ORDER DATED 27.09.2017 MAY BE RECALLED A ND THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. WE FIND FORCE IN THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD. COUNSEL. WHILE ACCEPTING THE PETITION OF THE ASSESSEE, WE RECALL OUR EX - PARTE ORDER M .P. NO . 2 9 8 / CHNY/201 7 3 DATED 27.09.2017 AND POST THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 13.06.2018. SINCE T HE DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AND THE LD. COUNSEL HAS ENDORSED HAVING NOTED THE DATE OF HEARING ON THE ORDER SHEET, NO SEPARATE NOTICE WOULD BE ISSUED TO BOTH PARTIES. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE M.P. FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 13 TH APRIL , 201 8 AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( ABRAHAM P. GEORGE ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( DUVVURU RL REDDY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 13 .0 4 . 201 8 VM/ - / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT , 2. / RESPONDENT , 3. ( ) / CIT(A) , 4. / CIT , 5. / DR & 6. / GF.