S R Log Products Pvt. Ltd., Howrah V. DCIT, Cir 13(2), Kol., Kolkata

MA 44/KOL/2023

AI Insights

S.R. Log Products Pvt. Ltd. filed a miscellaneous application to recall an order dated 19.03.2018, which had dismissed their appeal due to non-prosecution. The company argued that their advocate failed to appear, and subsequent personal and administrative issues led to the delay in addressing the Tribunal's order. However, the Tribunal found the reasons provided to be vague and unsupported by concrete evidence, leading to the dismissal of the application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 122951 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 16-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 10-07-2023
• Laws Referred To: ITAT Rules
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH ‘D’ KOLKATA BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA No. 44/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 [Arising out of ITA No. 360/KOL/2017] S.R. Log Products Pvt. Ltd. 268, Naryani Complex, G.T. Road, Liluah, Howrah-711204. PAN: AAICS 6648 D Vs. DCIT, Circle-13(2), Kolkata Appellant Respondent Present for: Assessee by : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue by : Shri B.K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 28.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 17.08.2023 ORDER PER SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This miscellaneous application filed by the assessee to recall the order passed by the Tribunal vide order dated 19.03.2018 in ITA No. 360/Kol/2017 wherein the Tribunal had dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non- prosecution of the case. 2. A perusal of the petition filed by the applicant wherein stating that on receipt of the order of the Tribunal, it came to the knowledge of the assessee that Shri Suraj Mondal, ld. Advocate engaged by the petitioner did not appear before the Tribunal and due to this reason, appeal of the assessee was dismissed and the assessee also stated that after receipt of the order passed by this Tribunal necessary steps could not be taken by the assessee due to the illness of the director, Shri Vivek Kumar Singh who was looking after the taxation matters of the company during the relevant time and even after his joining, assessee even could not pursue the matter as the file containing the M.A. 44/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 S.R. Log Products Pvt. Ltd. 2 relevant papers of the case was misplaced. In the mean time, the misplaced file was located while cleaning the office of the assessee and immediately approached the Tribunal through its counsel for recalling the order dated 19.03.2018 passed by this Tribunal. 3. We from the perusal of the petitioner assertion that the order passed by the Tribunal dated 19.03.2018 sought for recall, but the assessee nowhere stated in the petition about the fact that when the impugned order was received, the assessee has simply filed a vague petition without supporting any concrete reason for such prolonged delay of 1755 days in filing of instant miscellaneous application before this Tribunal. Even, the assessee without specifying any provisions of law under which impugned order to be recalled. However, from the content of the application, it appears that the avenue available to the Tribunal (in the given fact situation) was the one contemplated in Rule 24 of the ITAT Rules for the sake of convenience, the same is extracted hereunder: “Hearing of appeal ex parte for default by the appellant. 24. Where, on the day fixed for hearing or on any other date to which the hearing may be adjourned, the appellant does not appear in person or through an authorised representative when the appeal is called on for hearing, the Tribunal may dispose of the appeal on merits after hearing the respondent: Provided that where an appeal has been disposed of as provided above and the appellant appears afterwards and satisfied the Tribunal that there was sufficient cause for his non-appearance, when the appeal was called on for hearing, the Tribunal shall make an order setting aside the ex parte order and restoring the appeal.” 4. A perusal of the said Rule although in the main part of Rule 24 when read with the provision, it satisfied that sufficient cause for non-appearance, when the appeal was called on for hearing, the Tribunal shall make an order setting aside ex-parte and restoring the appeal. However, present fact of the case and on perusal of the petition filed by the assessee, the assessee has M.A. 44/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 S.R. Log Products Pvt. Ltd. 3 completely failed to prove any concrete reason for non-appearance on the date of hearing of the appeal and in this regard assessee even failed to produce any sufficient evidence by adducing evidence in support of claim for filing the instant miscellaneous application before the Tribunal by stating sufficient cause to satisfy us. We, therefore, do not find any merit in instant miscellaneous application filed by the assessee as such we dismiss the application filed by the assessee. 5. In the result, miscellaneous application of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on17.08.2023. Sd/- Sd/- (Manish Borad) (Sonjoy Sarma) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated:17.08.2023. Biswajit Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- S.R. Log Products Pvt. Ltd. 2. Respondent – DCIT, Circle-13(2), Kolkata. 3. Ld. CIT 4. Ld. CIT(A) 5. Ld. DR 6. True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata