Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

MA 417/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5177 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 16-02-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 20-06-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHE ‘Friday-E’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Amit Shukla, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member MA No. 417/Del/2018 (in ITA No. 1589/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07) Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., 9, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Vs ACIT, LTU, New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACM0828R Assessee by : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 03.12.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 17.02.2022 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the assessee arising out of the order dated 14.05.2018 in ITA No. 1589/Del/2015. 2. The assessee filed appeal before the ITAT on 19.03.2015. An ex-parte order has been passed by the ITAT on 09.05.2018 mentioning that on the date of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any request for adjournment was field. It was stated before us that the assessee has received the order passed by the ITAT in the above case whereby the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed for non-prosecution by applying the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT in the case of Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320 and the decision of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT 223 ITR 480. The assessee MA No. 417/Del/2018 Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. 2 submitted that in the appeal filed clearly mentioned its address. However, no notice was received by the assessee on the said address. Hence, neither the assessee nor its Authorized Representative could attend the hearing. 3. We find that the contention of the assessee is acceptable and no prejudice would be caused to any of the parties by recalling the order. Hence, the order of the ITAT is recalled. 4. The Miscellaneous Applications of the assessee is hereby allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 17/02/2022. Sd/- Sd/- (Amit Shukla) (Dr. B.R.R. Kumar) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 17/02/2022 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR