The Executive Engineer P W D (N.H) Division, Indore V. The Tax Recovery Officer TDS 2, Indore

MA 33/IND/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6003 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 24-01-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 07-01-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 27-08-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K MITRA
• 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 M.A. NOS. 32 AND 33/IND/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS. 167 AND 168/IND/2009) A.YS. 2005-06 AND 2006-07 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD (N.H.)DIVISION INDORE PAN BPLEO-0296C APPLICANT VS TAX RECOVERY OFFICER TDS-2, INDORE RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY : SHRI MANOJ GUPTA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.K. MITRA O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER BY THESE APPLICATIONS THE ASSESSEE SEEKS RECALLING THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 5.5.2010 ON THE GROUND THAT THE NOTICE FOR HEARING SENT BY THE REGISTRY OF THE TRIBUNAL WAS NO T SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. DURING HEARING OF THESE APPLICATIONS, THE ASSESSEE APPEARED IN PERSON AND EXPLAINED THAT THE REGISTERED LETTER SENT BY THE REGISTRY WAS RECEIVED BY ANOTHER OFFICE OF PWD WHICH WAS NOT HANDED OVER TO 2 THE ASSESSEE AND AS SUCH HE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE OF HEARING. AN AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT THIS CONTENTION WAS ALSO FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED S ENIOR DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE CONTENDED THAT IT SEEMS TO BE AN AFT ER-THOUGHT OF THE ASSESSEE AND IT IS A DELIBERATE AVOIDANCE OF NOTICE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. 2. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RE CORD. IT IS SEEN THAT THE POSTAL DEPARTMENT RETURNED THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ON WHICH THE OFFICE SEAL OF THE PWD HAS BEEN AFFIXED. HOWEVER, THE SAME IS QUITE NOT VISIBLE. AT THE SAME TIME, THE NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE ADDRESS AS PROVIDED IN FORM NO. 36. KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE THAT NO PERSON SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD AND BY TAKING A LENIENT VIEW, THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE TR IBUNAL DATED 5.5.2010 IS RECALLED. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO REMAIN VIGILA NT IN FUTURE AND IS EXPECTED TO COOPERATE FOR EARLY DISPOSAL OF HIS APP EALS. THE ASSESSEE/AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE IS DIRECTED TO A PPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 14.3.2011 FOR HEARING OF THE APPEALS FI LED BY HIM FOR WHICH NO SEPARATE NOTICE OF HEARING SHALL BE SENT TO THE ASSESSEE AS THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING WAS DULY PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COU RT IN THE PRESENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. FINALLY, THESE APPLICATIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE AL LOWED. 3 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 18 TH JANUARY, 2011. (R.C.SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 24 TH JANUARY, 2011 COPY TO: APPELLANT, RESPONDENT, CIT, CIT(A), DR, G UARD FILE DN/-