Pooja Dhiman, Delhi V. ITO,Ward-59(5), Delhi

MA 396/DEL/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6014 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-07-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 16-05-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 08-10-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANDEEP KR. MISHRA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER & Dr.B.R.R.KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.No.396/Del/2023 [In ITA No.2855/Del/2022] [Assessment Year : 2017-18] Pooja Dhiman, B-337, MIG DDA Flat, East of Loni Road, New Delhi-110093. PAN-AOMPD6593D vs ITO, Ward-59(5), Delhi. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri M R Sahu, CA Respondent by Shri Sandeep Kr. Mishra, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 17.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement 05.07.2024 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : By this Miscellaneous application, the assessee is seeking recalling of the ex-parte order dated 27.06.2023 passed by the Tribunal in ITA No.2855/Del/2022 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made in the application. He contended that there was a reasonable cause for remaining absent on the date of hearing. He further submitted that the application had been filed for rectifying the defects but the Assessing Officer (“AO”) did not rectify and deposit the appeal fee in proper head. He submitted that the reason for absence of the assessee in the hearing was not deliberately but due to the reasons as stated in the application. 3. On the other hand, Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue opposed these submissions and submitted that the assessee should have been vigilant. Page | 2 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The assessee in the Miscellaneous Application has stated that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed for want of prosecution and the appeal being defective. So far, the reason for being absent on the date of hearing, it is stated that an application seeking adjournment was filed but the same could not be placed before this Tribunal. It is further submitted that in respect of defects, the assessee has been trying to get it rectified. He drew our attention to the application filed by the assessee before the AO. Considering the submissions and material placed on record, we are of the considered view that there was a reasonable cause for not attending the hearing. We therefore, recall our order dated 27.06.2023 passed by us and direct the Registry to fix the appeal at its original Number after the defects are rectified by the assessee. The M.A. filed by the assessee is accordingly, allowed. 5. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 05 th July, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr.B.R.R.KUMAR) (KUL BHARAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER * Amit Kumar * Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI