M/s Laxmi Mangal Warehouse, Neemuch V. The ITO, Neemuch

MA 30/IND/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8142 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-05-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 23-02-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARUN DEWAN
• Assessee Lawyers: S S DESHPANDE
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NOS. 29, 30, 31, 32 & 33/IND/2012 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS.158, 159, 160, 161 & 163/IN D/2011) A.Y.: 2006-07 1. M/S. RAJWANT SINGH & PARTY, NEEMUCH PAN AAAAR 49999 L 2. M/S. LAXMI MANGAL WAREHOUSE, NEEMUCH PAN AACFL 2242 G 3. M/S. MAHESHWARI WAREHOUSE, NEEMUCH PAN AALFM 7899 Q 4. M/S. LAXMINARAYAN SONS, NEEMUCH PAN AABFL 9122 B 5. M/S. KACHOLIYA ROADWAYS, NEEMUCH PAN AAAAK 5351 M ..APPLICANTS V/S. ITO-NEEMUCH ..RESPONDENT ASSESSEES BY : SHRI S.S. DESHPANDE, CA DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI ARUN DEWAN, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 4.5.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 4.5.2012 ORDER PER JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER BY THIS BUNCH OF FIVE MISCELLANEOUS A PPLICATIONS U/S 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, THE ASSESSEES SEEK TO RECALL AN EX-PARTE ORDER 2 OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 27.12.2011 ON THE GROUND THAT THE NOTICES FOR HEARING FOR 27.12.2011 WERE RECEIVED BY SHRI N. PAT IDAR, WHO IS THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEES. HOWEVER, THE COUNSEL HAD TO GO TO JAIPUR ON 25.12.2011 FOR MEDICAL CHECKUP AND AS SUC H HE COULD NOT ATTEND THE HEARING. THE STAFF OF THE COUNSEL ALSO D ID NOT APPLY FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE HEARING AND THE APPEALS WERE, AC CORDINGLY, DISMISSED EXPARTE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. THEREFORE, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEALS COULD NOT BE ATTENDED ON A GENUINE REASON, CONSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEES MAY BE PROVIDED OPPORTU NITY OF BEING HEARD. PLEA WAS ALSO RAISED THAT AN EXPARTE ORDER M AY BE RECALLED. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED SENIOR DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DEFENDED THE ORDER BY CONTENDING THAT IT WAS THE DU TY OF THE ASSESSEES TO REMAIN VIGILANT AND SHOULD HAVE TELEPH ONICALLY INFORMED THE REGISTRY OF THE TRIBUNAL REGARDING ADJ OURNMENT. 2. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRI NCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE THAT NO PERSON SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD, THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 27.12.2011 IS RECALLED AND THE RESPECTIVE APPEALS ARE REFIXED FOR FINAL HEARING FO R 23.5.2012. SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COUR T AND DULY 3 NOTED BY THE RESPECTIVE PARTIES, THEREFORE, NO NOTI CE FOR HEARING FOR 23.5.2012 SHALL BE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRY TO EITHER PARTY. FINALLY, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS OF THE ASS ESSEES ARE ALLOWED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRES ENCE OF LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE SIDES AT THE CO NCLUSION OF HEARING ON 4.5.2012. SD/- SD/- (R.C. SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 4.5.2012 COPY TO : APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT/CIT(A)/DR !VYS!