Ganna Vikas Parishad, Bareilly V. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(2), Bareilly

MA 31/LKW/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9305 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 04-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: YOGESH AGRAWAL SHRI AJAY KU
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NO.31/LKW/2019 (IN I.T.A. NO.728/LKW/2017) ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 GANNA VIKAS PARISHAD, SEMIKHERA, BHOJIPURA, BAREILLY. PAN:AAKFG6618G VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), BAREILLY. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER T. S. KAPOOR, A.M. THIS MISC. APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSES SEE UNDER RULE 24 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES FOR RECALLING OF TH E EX-PARTE ORDER QUA ASSESSEE DATED 31/10/2018. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LEARNED A. R. INVITED OUR ATTENTI ON TO THE FACT THAT THERE IS A DELAY OF 36 DAYS IN FILING THE MISC. APP LICATION AND FURTHER INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY AND ALSO INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE AFFIDAVIT NARRATING THEREIN TH E REASONS FOR DELAY IN FILING THE MISC. APPLICATION AND IT WAS PRAYED THAT THE DELAY MAY BE APPELLANT BY SHRI YOGESH AGRAWAL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY SHRI AJAY KUMAR, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 20/09/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 04/10/2019 2 CONDONED AND THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 31/10/ 2018 BE RECALLED AND APPEAL BE HEARD ON MERITS. 3. LEARNED D. R., ON THE OTHER, HAND SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE TH ROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. LEARNED A. R. HAS FILED APPLICATI ON FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE MISC. APPLICATION FOR RECALLING OF THE ORDER DATED 31/10/2018. THERE IS NO TIME LIMIT SPECIFIED UNDER RULE 24 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES THEREFORE, THERE IS NO QUESTION OF C ONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE MISC. APPLICATION. RULE 24 ENTITLES THE APPELLANT TO APPLY FOR RECALLING OF THE EX-PARTE ORDER. FOR THE SAKE OF C OMPLETENESS, RULE 24 OF THE I.T.A.T. RULES IS REPRODUCED BELOW: 24. HEARING OF APPEAL EX PARTE FOR DEFAULT BY THE APPELLANT WHERE ON THE DAY FIXED FOR HEARING OR ANY OTHER DAT E TO WHICH THE HEARING MAY BE ADJOURNED, THE APPELLANT DOES NO T APPEAR IN PERSON OR THROUGH AN AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE WH EN THE APPEAL IS CALLED ON FOR HEARING, THE TRIBUNAL MAY D ISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERITS AFTER HEARING THE RESPONDENT: PROVIDED THAT WHERE AN APPEAL HAS BEEN DISPOSED OF A S PROVIDED ABOVE AND THE APPELLANT APPEARS AFTERWARDS AND SATISFIES THE TRIBUNAL THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAU SE FOR HIS NON-APPEARANCE WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED ON FOR HEA RING, THE TRIBUNAL SHALL MAKE AN ORDER SETTING ASIDE THE EX PARTE ORDER AND RESTORING THE APPEAL. 4.1 IN THIS CASE THE ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED EX-PARTE QUA ASSESSEE. WE FIND FROM THE CONTENTS OF APPLICATION THAT THE REAS ON FOR NON APPEARANCE 3 ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING ARE QUITE REASONABLE THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DESERVES TO BE RECALLED. WE ORDER AC CORDINGLY AND THE ORDER DATED 31/10/2018 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS RECALLED AND REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON MERITS IN DUE COURSE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSE SSEE STANDS ALLOWED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04/10/2019) SD/. SD/. ( A. D. JAIN ) ( T. S . KAPOOR ) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:04/10/2019 *SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW