PAN INSURANCE BROKERAGE COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED , HARYANA V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 8(2), MUMBAI

MA 302/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6432 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-04-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: J
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M V RAJGURU

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL J , BENCH, MUMBAI , , , BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, AM AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM MA NO. 302/M UM/ 2017 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 4198 /MUM/201 4 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004 - 05 ) M/S PAN INSURANCE BROKERAGE CO. PVT. LTD., (NOW TEAM INDIA INSURANCE BROKING SERVICES PVT. LTD.) 3 RD FLOOR, A - BLOCK, PALAM TRIANGLE, PALAM VIHAR, GOREGAON - 122017 VS. THE ACIT, CIRCEL - 8(2), 3 RD FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI - 400020 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AACCP 9316 R ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV (AR) /REVENUE BY : SHRI M.V. RAJGURU (DR) / DATE OF HEARING : 19/01 /201 8 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13 /0 4 / 2018 / O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM THE ASSESSEE HAS MOVED THE PRESENT APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT) AND INCOME TAX RULE 24 OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 FOR RECALLING THE ORDER DATED 05 .05.2017 PASSED BY J BENCH OF ITAT, MUMBAI IN ITA NO. 4198/MUM/2014. 2. ITA NO. 4198/MUM/2014 WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 02.05.2017. SINCE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAID DATE, THE BENCH DISPOSE D OF THE SAID APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF MATE RIAL ON RECORD . ACCORDINGLY, AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR THE SAID APPEAL WAS HEARD EX - PARTE AND THE ASSESSEES APPEAL WAS DISMISSED VIDE ORDER DATED 05.05.2017. 2 M.A . NO. 302/MUM/2017 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 4198/MUM/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2004 - 05 3. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SENT AN APPLICATIO N FOR ADJOURNMENT AS THE CONCERNED CA MR. VINOD RAWAL WAS OUT OF COUNTRY. THE SAID APPLICATION WAS SENT BY POST TO THE OFFICE OF ITAT, WHICH WAS RECEIVED ON 01.05.2017, HOWEVER, THE SAME WAS NOT PLACED BEFORE THE BENCH FOR THE REASONS BEST KNOWN TO THE REG ISTRY . THE LD. COUNSEL FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT S INCE, THERE WAS NO NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE, THE EX - PARTE ORDER MAY BE RECALLED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL RELIED ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF BTX CHEMICALS VS. CIT 288 ITR (GUJ), DECISION OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SEIL INDIA, 284 ITR (DEL) AND DECISION OF HONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. GHERU LAL BAL CHAND 269 ITR 386 (P&H) TO SUBSTANTIATE I TS CONTENTION. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR OPPOSED THE APPLICATION ON THE GROUND THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR ON A NUMBER OF TIMES BEFORE THE DATE OF HEARING, THE BENCH RIGHTLY PRECEDED EX - PARTE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO M ERIT IN THE CONTENTION OF THE APPLICANT. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND ALSO GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED THE COPY OF APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT DATED 26.04.2017, SENT TO THE REGISTRY IN WHICH IT IS MEN TIONED THAT THE COUNSEL MR. VINOD RAWAL IS OUT OF COUNTRY, SINCE 4 TH APRIL, 2017 AND WILL BE RETURNING BACK ON 29 TH APRIL, 2017. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE REQUEST, THE ASSESSEE HAD SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO ENCLOSED THE COPY OF TRACK RECORD DOWN LOADED FROM THE WEBSITE OF INDIAN POST AS PER WHICH ONE LETTER WAS DELIVERED ON 01.05.2017 TO THE OFFICE OF THE ITAT AT 15:01:00. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SUBMITTED THE COPY OF PASSPORT OF MR. VINOD RAWAL HAVING ENDORSEMENT THEREON REGARDING HIS VISIT. SH. RA JEEV SHARMA DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS SUBMITTED AN AFFIDAVIT TO THE EFFECT THAT THE APPLICATION DATED 26.04.2017 WAS DRAFTED UNDER HIS INSTRUCTIONS AND THE SAME WAS POSTED BY THE OFFICIAL OF THE COMPANY. 3 M.A . NO. 302/MUM/2017 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 4198/MUM/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2004 - 05 7. FROM THE AFORESAID DOCUMENTS , WE ARE CONVINCED THAT DUE TO COMMUNICATION GAP OR SOME OTHER UNAVOIDABLE REASONS, THE APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT COULD NOT BE PLACED BEFORE THE BENCH BY THE REGISTRY AND THE BENCH HEARD THE APPEAL UNDER THE BONA FIDE BELIEF THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTEREST ED IN PURSUING ITS CASE. IN VTX CHEMICALS VS. CIT (SUPRA), THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT HAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT SUFFER FOR A NEGLIGENCE OF THE PROFESSIONAL. THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. SEIL INDIA (SUPRA) HAS HELD THAT PROVISIONS TO RULE 24 PROVIDES POWERS TO THE ITAT FOR RECALLING EX - PARTE ORDER, IF, THERE IS SUFFICIENT CASE FOR NONE APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE HONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. GHERU LAL BAL CHAND (SUPRA). 8. IN VI EW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, UNDER WHICH THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE OF HEARING, AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE CASES RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THERE WAS NO NEGLIGENCE OR INACTION ON THE PAR T OF THE ASSESSEE IN NON APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING. WE ACCORDINGLY HOLD THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HENCE, WE RECALL THE ORDER DATED 05.05.201 7 AND DIRECT THE REGI STRY TO FIX THE CASE BEFORE THE REGULAR B ENCH FOR HEARING AFRESH. ACCORDINGLY, TH E APPLICATION FOR RECALLING OF THE ORDER IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13 TH APRIL, 2018 . SD/ - SD/ - ( RAJENDRA ) ( RAM LAL NEGI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED: 13/ 04 / 2018 ALINDRA, PS 4 M.A . NO. 302/MUM/2017 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 4198/MUM/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2004 - 05 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARD ED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MU MBAI