Sh. Sudhir Kumar Sharma, Ludhiana V. ITO, Ludhiana

MA 37/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5530 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 17-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K S BAINS
• Assessee Lawyers: KULDEEP SINGH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NOS.37 & 38/CHD/2017 IN ITA NOS.768 & 769/CHD/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2006-07 & 2009-10) SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR SHARMA, VS. THE ITO, 70, NEW LAJPAT NAGAR WARD VI(3), LUDHIANA. LUDHIANA. PAN: ADBPS0503N AND M.A.NOS.39 & 40/CHD/2017 IN ITA NOS.770 & 771/CHD/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2006-07 & 2009-10) SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR SHARMA, HUF VS. THE ITO, 70, NEW LAJPAT NAGAR WARD VI(3), LUDHIANA. LUDHIANA. PAN: AAKHS0128R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI KULDEEP SINGH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.S. BAINS, ADDL.CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 27.10.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.11.2017 ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M . : THE ABOVE MENTIONED MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ARE FILED BY THE APPLICANT FOR RECALLING OF THE CONSOLI DATED ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 15.11.2016 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 & 2009-10, WHICH WERE DISMISSED EX-PARTE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 2. THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED THAT VIDE LETTER DATED 1.11.2016 SENT THROUGH SPEED POST (COPY ENCLOSED) 2 THIRTEEN APPEALS INCLUDING THE ABOVE MENTIONED, WHI CH HAVE BEEN EX-PARTE, A REQUEST HAD BEEN MADE TO THE HON'BLE BENCH REGARDING CONSOLIDATION OF APPEALS FO R THE REASONS GIVEN BELOW: THAT THE ABOVE STATED APPEALS WITH SIMILAR ISSUE INVOLVED OF ABOVE STATED ASSESSEE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR SHARMA, HIS FAMILY AND RELATED BUSINESS CONCERNS RELATING TO ABOVE MENTIONED ASSESSMENT YEAR ARE FIXED BEFORE HON'BLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH, CHANDIGARH ON DIFFERENT DATES AS STATED IN REFERENCE (ENCLOSED NOTICES) THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT IT WAS FURTHER REQUESTED T O REFIX THE APPEALS AFTER CONSOLIDATION. IT WAS ON TH IS REASON THAT THE HEARING ON 16.11.2016 WAS NOT ATTENDED. 3. THE LD. DR DID NOT CONTROVERT THE SAME. 4. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ENTIRE FACTS OF THE CASE. WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVE NTED BY SUFFICIENT REASON FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE T RIBUNAL ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING TO PROSECUTE THE A PPEALS. WE ARE, THEREFORE, OF THE OPINION THAT TO MEET THE ENDS OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN A REA SONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. EXERCISING THE POWER OF THE TRIBUNAL PROVIDED IN THE PROVISO TO RULES 24 AND 25 OF THE ITAT RULES 1963, TO SET ASIDE AN EX-PARTE ORDER AND RESTORE THE APPEAL IN CASE WHERE AN ASSESSEE DEMONS TRATES REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE, AND CONSIDERIN G THE ENTIRETY OF FACTS IN THE PRESENT CASE, WE ARE OF TH E VIEW THAT THIS IS A FIT CASE FOR RECALLING THE ORDER FOR FRESH 3 HEARING, WHICH WE HEREBY DO. THE REGISTRY IS DIRE CTED TO FIX THE HEARING OF THE APPEALS IN DUE COURSE AND IS SUE FORMAL NOTICE OF THE SAME TO BOTH THE PARTIES. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIO NS FILED BY THE APPLICANT IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (SANJAY GARG) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 17 TH NOVEMBER, 2017 *RATI* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 4