Sanjay Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Delhi V. ITO Ward 7 (3), New Delhi

MA 3/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4471 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-02-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 04-01-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BANITA DEVI NAOREM

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL M.A.NO. 03(DEL)/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 3036(DEL)/2007) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-02 M/S SANJAY ENTERPRISES (P) LTD., INCOME-TAX OFFICER, 20, ANSARI ROAD, VS . WARD 7(3), NEW DELHI. DARYAGANJ, NEW DELHI. (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT ) APPLICANT BY : SHRI RAJ KUMAR, C.A. RESPONDENT BY: MS. BANITA DEVI NAOREM, SR. DR ORDER PER K.G. BANSAL : AM IN THIS CASE, THE TRIBUNAL HAD PASSED THE ORD ER ON 10.12.2008, IN WHICH THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PARTLY ALLOWED. THE ORDER WAS PASSED EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE INTER-ALIA FOR THE REASON THAT NOTICE OF HEARING DATED 22.10.2008 WAS ISSUED TO THE A SSESSEE, FIXING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 10.12.2008, BUT NOBODY ATTEN DED ON THIS DAY. NO APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS ALSO RECEIV ED. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF EARLIER HEARINGS, IT WAS HELD THAT THE ASSES SEE HAD NOTHING FURTHER TO SAY IN THE MATTER. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL WAS DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF FACTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE FILED A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION MA NO. 03(DEL)/2010 2 ON 4.1.2010 STATING INTER-ALIA THAT THE NOTIC E FOR HEARING THE CASE ON 10.12.2008 WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE OR ANY OTHER AUTHORIZED PERSON. THEREFORE, NON-APPEARANCE ON 10.12.2008 WAS ON ACCOUNT OF NON-RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE. IT WAS REQUESTED THAT THE EX-PARTE ORDER MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THE APPEAL MAY BE HEARD AN D DECIDED ON MERITS. 2. THIS VERY FACT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING ON THE APPLICATION . IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT SHRI SANJAY AGGARWAL, THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, HAD ALSO FILED AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 18.12.2009 TO T HE EFFECT THAT NEITHER HE NOR ANY AUTHORIZED AGENT RECEIVED THE NOTICE OF HEARING FOR 10.12.2008. IN REPLY, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT WHILE EARLIER NOTICES WERE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, IT IS NOT UNDE RSTANDABLE AS TO HOW NOTICE FOR HEARING ON 10.12.2008 WAS NOT RECE IVED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AN D SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE US. ON PERUSAL OF THE RECORD, IT IS SE EN THAT A NOTICE DATED 23.10.2008 WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE FIXING T HE CASE FOR HEARING ON 10.12.2008. HOWEVER, THE EVIDENCE OF ITS SERV ICE IS NOT ON RECORD. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE THINK IT FIT TO RECALL T HE ORDER SO THAT THE APPEAL MA NO. 03(DEL)/2010 3 MAY BE DECIDED ON MERITS AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. FOR THIS PURPOSE, THE APPEAL IS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 14.4.2010. THIS DATE WAS INTIMATED TO BOTH THE PARTIES IN THE OPEN COURT SOON AFTER CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING AND THEY WERE INFORMED THAT NO NOTICE SHALL BE ISSUED FOR THIS HEARING. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPLICATION IS ALLOWED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19.2.2010 SOON AFTER COMPLETION OF THE HEARING OF THE APPLICATION. SD/- SD/- (C.L. SETHI) (K.G.BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE OF ORDER: 19.02.2010. SP SATIA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- M/S SANJAY ENTERPRISES (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. ITO, WARD 7(3), NEW DELHI. CIT(A) CIT THE DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR.