Rishab Enterprises, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

MA 333/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6196 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 16-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 26-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S VIJAYAPRABHA
• Assessee Lawyers: A S SRIRAMAN

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI ... , !' .#$#%, ' '( BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER )) / M.P. NO.255/CHNY/2016 (IN I.T.A. NO.1349/MDS/2016) % *% / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 M/S S.1211 AYYAMPERUMAMPATTY PACS LTD., 5/341, NEAR PANCHAYAT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, ALAGAPURAM PUDUR, SALEM-636 016 PAN : AAEAS 5866 R V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(4), SALEM (,-% /PETITIONER) (,.-// RESPONDENT) ,-% 1 2 /PETITIONER BY : SH. A.S. SRIRAMAN, ADVOCATE ,.-/ 1 2 / RESPONDENT BY : MS. S. VIJAYAPRABHA, JCIT 3 1 4' / DATE OF HEARING : 16.02.2018 56* 1 4' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.02.2018 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETITION PRAYING FOR RECALL THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 02.08.2016. 2. SH. A.S. SRIRAMAN, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESS EE, SUBMITTED THAT BY AN INADVERTENT MISTAKE, THE COUNS EL OF THE 2 M.P. NO.255/CHNY/16 ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON 0 2.08.2016 WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING. THE INADVERTE NT MISTAKE OF THE COUNSEL, ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, CANNOT BE A REASON FOR PENALIZING THE ASSESSEE. THE LD.COUNSEL FURTHER SU BMITTED THAT ONE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE FOR ARGUIN G THE CASE ON MERIT. 3. WE HEARD MS. S. VIJAYAPRABHA, THE LD. DEPARTMENT AL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. THE ONLY CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL IS THAT THERE WAS NO REASON ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON 02.08.2016 WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING. THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE ASSESSEE ENG AGED THE COUNSEL WHO, BY INADVERTENT MISTAKE, FAILED TO APPE AR BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING O N 02.08.2016. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINI ON THAT GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO ARGUE ITS CASE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL WOULD NOT PREJUDICE THE INTERESTS OF REVEN UE IN ANY WAY. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT GIV ING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE WOULD DEFINITELY PROMOT E THE CAUSE OF JUSTICE. THEREFORE, IN EXERCISE OF THE POWER CONFER RED ON THIS TRIBUNAL UNDER PROVISO TO RULE 24 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963, THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 02.08.2016 I S HEREBY RECALLED. 3 M.P. NO.255/CHNY/16 4. NOW THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I.T.A. NO.1349 /MDS/2016 IS RESTORED ON THE FILE OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE REGIS TRY IS DIRECTED TO POST THE APPEAL FOR FINAL DISPOSAL ON 26.04.2018. SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING WAS ANNOUNCED IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE P ARTIES, IT MAY NOT BE NECESSARY FOR THE REGISTRY TO ISSUE A SEPARA TE NOTICE OF HEARING. IN OTHER WORDS, A COPY OF THIS ORDER SHAL L BE TREATED AS NOTICE FOR HEARING ON 26.04.2018. 5. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THE MISCELLANEOUS PE TITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. 6. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH FEBRUARY, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( !' .#$#% ) ( ... ) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) (N.R.S. GANESAN) ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 8 /DATED, THE 16 TH FEBRUARY, 2018. KRI. 1 ,49) :)*4 /COPY TO: 1. ,-% / PETITIONER 2. ,.-/ /RESPONDENT 3. 3 ;4 () /CIT(A) 4. 3 ;4 /CIT 5. )< ,4 /DR 6. =% > /GF.