Sumitra Bai, Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(3), Hyderabad

MA 39/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6868 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 27-07-2018
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 20-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJEEV BENJWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ANAM SIDDIQUI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A SMC BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DE VI , JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A.NO. 39/HYD/2018 (ARISING OUT OF ITA. NO.1596/HYD/2017) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007 - 2008 SUMITRA BAI, HYDERABAD. PAN: AGKPB 4157 D VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11(3), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE: SMT. ANAM SIDDIQUI FOR REVENUE : SHRI RAJEEV BENJWAL, DR DATE OF HEARING : 27.07.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31 .07.2018 ORDER PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JM . THIS IS AN APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SEEKING RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 22.02.2018 DISMISSING THE ASSESSEES APPEALS FOR NON - APPEARANCE AND ALSO ON MERITS OF THE CASE. THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED AS UNDER IN THE APPLICATION FILED BY HER. THIS IS TO INFORM YOU THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HONBLE MEMBERS OF BENCH A DATED 22.02.2018 WHICH WAS PASSED WITHOUT GIVING THE ASSESSEE AN OP PORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. YOUR HONOUR MAY PLEASE NOTE THAT ASSESSEE HAD NOT RECEIVED THE NOTICE OF DATE OF HEARING AS MENTIONED IN THE ABOVE ORDER. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 22.02,2018 WITHOUT INTIMATING THE ASSESSEE THAT THE CASE HAS BEEN POSTED FOR HEARING. 2. AS SEEN FROM THE ABOVE, ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT SHE HAS NOT RECEIVED THE NOTICE OF DATE OF HEARING. ON PERUSAL OF THE APPEAL FOLDER, IT IS SEEN THAT THE MATTER HAD COME UP FOR THE FIRST TIME ON 22.02.2018 AND THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE BY ONE MR. SAMEER IS 2 ON RECORD. O N EARLIER DATES OF HEARING, THE TRIBUNAL HAD DIRECTED THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE TO VERIFY WHETHER ANY PERSON BY NAME MR. S AMEER HAD RECEIVED NOTICES ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD DEPARTM ENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS FILED THE REPORT OF THE ITO, WARD - 11(3), HYDERABAD TODAY, WHEREIN ITO HAS STATED THAT THERE ARE NO ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD OF ANY NOTICE OR LETTER RECEIVED BY MR. SAMEER AND THAT THERE WAS ONLY ONE SERVED ON A PERSON N AMED MADHU. TAKING THE SAME INTO CONSIDERATION, I AM SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE MIGHT NOT HAVE RECEIVED THE NOTICE OF HEARING. IN VIEW OF THE SAME , AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I AM INCLINED TO RECALL THE ORDER DATED 22.02.2018 AND RE - FIX THE APPEAL F OR HEARING ON 27.08.2018. SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING IS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES, NO FRESH NOTICE IS REQUIRED TO BE SENT. 3. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST JULY, 2018. S D/ - (SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 31 ST JULY, 2018. OKK, SR.PS COPY TO 1. SUMITRA BAI, 6 - 56 - 2, OPP. IDPL, BALANAGAR, HYDERABAD. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11(3), HYDERABAD. 3. CIT (A) - 5, HYDERABAD. 4. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 5, HYDERABAD. 5. DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE