M/s. Clan Morgan Holding Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

MA 38/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6653 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 01-07-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 03-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURJANI MOHANTY
• Assessee Lawyers: B N GOSWAMY

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH B DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, JM AND SHRI K. D. RANJAN, AM MISC. APP. NO. 38 (DEL) OF 2011 [ IN I. T. A. NO. 4440 (DEL) OF 2010 ]. ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06. M/S. CLAN MORGAN HOLDING PVT. LTD., ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, 208 / 216, DDA COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, VS. CENTR AL CIRCLE : 5, AUROBINDO PLACE, HAUZ KHAS, N E W D E L H I. N E W D E L H I 110 016. P A N / G I R NO. AAB CC 8084 A. ( APPLICANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI B. N. GOSWAMY, ADV.; DEPARTMENT BY : MS. SURJANI MOHAN TY, SR. D. R.; O R D E R. PER K. D. RANJAN, AM : THIS MISC. APPLICATION BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FI LED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 06TH DECEMBER, 2010 PASSED BY THE ITAT FOR ASSESSME NT YEAR 2005-06. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN HIS MISC. APPLICATION ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT HAS STATED THAT THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 6 TH DECEMBER, 2010. IT HAS BEEN FURTHER STATED THAT T HOUGH THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 06 TH DECEMBER, 2010, BUT THE OFFICE CLERK OF THE APPELL ANTS COUNSEL SHRI SATISH CHANDER GUATAM INADVERTENTLY NOTED THE DATE OF HEARING AS 10 TH DECEMBER, 2010. THE COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT DULY APPEARED ON 10 TH DECEMBER, 2010 AND WAS INFORMED THAT THE APPEAL WAS IN FACT FIXED ON 6 TH DECEMBER, 2010 AND HAD BEEN DISMISSED BY THE BENCH FOR NON- APPEARANCE. THE OMISSION TO APPEAR ON THE DATE OF HEARING WAS NEITHER WILLFUL NOR INTENTIONAL, 2 MISC. APP. NO. 38 (DEL) OF 2011 BUT DUE TO THE REASON STATED ABOVE AND THE COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT WAS PREVENTED FROM APPEARING ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING DUE TO MIST AKE OF HIS CLERK. HE HAS FILED AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI SATISH CHANDER GAUTAM IN THIS REGARD. IN VIEW OF T HE ABOVE FACTS IT HAS BEEN PLEADED THAT NON- APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT WILLFU L AND THE ASSESSEE IS VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAD EXPLAINED THE REASONS FOR NON-ATTENDAN CE ON THE DATE OF HEARING. WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE , AS MENTIONED IN THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED. WE, THEREFORE, RECALL THE ORDER FOR FRESH A DJUDICATION. THE APPEAL IS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 05TH SEPTEMBER, 2011 FOR WHICH NO NOTICE WILL BE ISSUED. BOTH THE PART IES WERE INFORMED IN OPEN COURT. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED ACCORDINGL Y. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY ASSESSEE, IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON : 01 ST JULY, 2011. SD/- SD/- [ A. D. JAIN ] [ K . D. RANJAN ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 01 ST JULY, 2011. *MEHTA * COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : - 1. APPLICANT. 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CIT, 4. CIT (APPEALS), 5. DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT. 3 MISC. APP. NO. 38 (DEL) OF 2011 4 MISC. APP. NO. 38 (DEL) OF 2011