ITO, Chandigarh V. K.K. Jerath, Chandigarh

MA 35/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5079 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 13-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NO.35 /CHD/2016 IN IT(SS)A. NO.74 /CHD/2004 ( BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1987 TO 20.11.1997 ) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. K..K.JERATH, WARD-1(4), #8, SECTOR 7, CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN: M.A.NO.36 /CHD/2016 IN IT(SS)A. NO.75 /CHD/2004 ( BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1987 TO 20.11.1997 ) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. KAPIL DEV JERATH, WARD-1(4), #8, SECTOR 7, CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN: M.A.NO.37 /CHD/2016 IN IT(SS)A. NO.76 /CHD/2004 ( BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1987 TO 20.11.1997 ) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. SAVITA JERATH, WARD-1(4), #8, SECTOR 7, CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN: AND M.A.NO.38 /CHD/2016 IN IT(SS)A. NO.77 /CHD/2004 ( BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1987 TO 20.11.1997 ) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. M/S VRINDAVAN ELECTRICALS, WARD-1(4), P.NO.93, PHASE-II, CHANDIGARH. PANCHKULA. PAN: (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) 2 APPLICANT BY : SHRI S.K. MITTAL, DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUDHIR SEHGAL DATE OF HEARING : 23.12.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23.12.2016 O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M . : THESE FOUR MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS RELATING TO DIFFERENT ASSESSES ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR RECALLING OF THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 22. 5.2013 RELATING TO BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1987 TO 20.11.1997, WH ICH WERE DISMISSED EX-PARTE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 2. THE REASON FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING GIVEN IN THE APPLICATIONS IS THAT THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE WAS ON LEAVE ON THE SAI D DATE AND THERE WAS NO WILLFUL OR INTENTIONAL NEGLEC T ON THE PART OF THE DEPARTMENT. 3. ON GOING THROUGH THE REASONS STATED IN THE PETITIONS AND AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE REVENUE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFIC IENT REASONS IN NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING TO PROSECUTE THE APPEALS. THEREFORE, WE RECALL THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 22.5.2013 IN IT(SS)A NOS. 74, 75, 76 & 77/CHD/2004 AND RESTORE THE APPEALS FOR FRESH DECIS ION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE HEARING OF THE APPEALS IS 3 FIXED ON 14.3.2017 FOR THE PURPOSE OF WHICH I SSUE OF FORMAL NOTICE IS WAIVED WITH THE CONSENT OF THE PAR TIES. 4. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE ABOVE FOUR MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 23 RD DECEMBER, 2016 *RATI* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH