Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Jagadhari V. ITO, Yamunanagar

MA 39/CHANDI/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8544 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 01-06-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-05-2012
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 27-02-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K SAINI
• Assessee Lawyers: SMANOHAR LAL MAHESH KUMAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MEHAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO. 39/CHD/2012 IN ITA NO. 516/CHD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 SHRI SASNJAY KUMAR, V ITO, W-1, L/H OF LATE SH.DHARAM SINGH KAMBOJ, YAMUNA NAGAR 1842, SECTOR 17, HUDA, JAGADHRI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : S/MANOHAR LAL& MAHESH KUMAR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI N.K.SAINI DATE OF HEARING : 01.06.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.06.2012 ORDER PER MEHAR SINGH, AM THE ASSESSEE FILED THIS MISC.APPLICATION UNDER RULE 24 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963, A RISING OUT OF ITA NO.516/CHD/2011. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THE MISC.APPLICATION DATED 21.02 .2012 CONTENDED THAT THE APPEAL IN THE CASE WAS DISPOSED OFF BY THE BENCH, FOR NON-PROSECUTION, VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 17 .10.2011. IT WAS, FURTHER, STATED IN THAT APPLICATION THAT NO NOTICE OF HEARING FOR 17.10.2011 WAS RECEIVED BY THE APPELLAN T OR ANY OF ITS LEGAL HEIRS. AN AFFIDAVIT TO THIS EFFECT HA S BEEN FILED. THE RELEVANT PART OF THE AFFIDAVIT IS REPRODUCED HE REUNDER: I, SANJAY KUMAR AGED 45 YEARS, LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHRI DHARAMSINGH KAMBOJ,R/O 1842,SECTOR 17, HUDA, JAGADHRI (HARYANA) DO HEREBY SOLEMNLY AFFIRM & DECL ARE: 1. THAT I AM LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHRI DHARAM SINGH KAMBOJ IN WHOSE CASE THE APPEAL FOR THE A.Y. 2006- 2 07 WAS DISMISSED BY THE HON'BLE CHANDIGARH BENCH OF ITAT AS PER ORDER DATED 17.10.2011 IN APPEAL NO.516/CHD/2011 FOR NON-PROSECUTION OF THE APPEAL. 2. THAT NEITHER I NOR ANY OTHER LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHR I DHARAM SINGH KAMBOJ NOR ANY EMPLOYEE OR FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE LEGAL HEIRS RECEIVED THE NOTICE FOR HEARING FOR THE AFORESAID APPEAL AS FIXED ON 17.10.2011. SD/- ( DEPONENT) (SANJAY KUMAR) 3. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECI SION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V S,.CHENNIAPPA MUDALIAR (1969) 74 ITR 41 (S.C) AND A NOTHER DECISION OF JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F CIT V GHERU LAL BAL CHAND (2004) 269 ITR 386 (P&H). IN V IEW OF THIS, LD. 'AR' CONTENDED, THAT TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, THE MISC.APPLICATION DESERVES TO BE ACCEPTED AND CONSEQ UENTLY, THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED FOR RECALL OF THE IMPUGNED O RDER, PASSED BY THE BENCH. 4. LD. 'DR', DID NOT SERIOUSLY CONTESTED THE ISSUE IN QUESTION. 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE CONTENTION RAISED BY THE LD. 'AR'. IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSEE FILED APPLICAT ION DATED 31.07.2011, REQUESTING FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE. THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 17.10.2011. HOWEVER, ON THE APPOINTED DATE, NO-ONE ATTENDED NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSEE. 6. HAVING REGARD TO THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY TH E LD. 'AR', AS ALSO TO MEET THE ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENT OF SUBSTANTIVE JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION, THAT THE IMPUGNED 3 M.A, FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, DESERVES TO BE ALLOWED. IN THIS CONTEXT, IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION HERE THAT SUBST ANTIVE JUSTICE MUST PREVAIL OVER TECHNICALITIES. THEREFOR E, HAVING REGARD TO THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AND, FURTHER, TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, MISC.APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 7. IN THE RESULT, MISC. APPLICATION, FILED BY THE A SSESSEE IS ALLOWED. REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE CASE ON 2 8.08.2012. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST JUNE,2012. SD/- SD/- (H.L.KARWA) (MEHAR SINGH) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 1 ST JUNE,2012. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH