Maersk A/s., Mumbai V. ACIT, Dehradun

MA 452/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0413 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-02-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 1998-1999
• Appeal Filed On: 20-08-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PEEYUSH SONKAR
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E NEW DELHI (FRIDAY) BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA M.A. NO. 452/DEL/2010 ( IN ITA NO. 3905/DEL/09 ) ASSTT. YR: 1998-99 MAERSK A/S, VS. ADDL. CIT SPL. RANGE, 612 CHURCHGATE CHAMBERS DEHRADUN. NEW MARINE LINES, MUMBAI. ( APPLICANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) APPLICANT BY : SH. DIVESH CHAWLA ADV. RESPONDENT BY: SH. PEEYUSH SONKAR SR. DR O R D E R PER R.P. TOLANI, J.M : THIS IS ASSESSEES MISC. APPLICATION PRAYING FOR RE CALLING OF ITAT ORDER DATED 12-5-2010 PASSED IN THE ABOVE CAPTIONE D APPEAL. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SU BMISSIONS MADE IN THE MISC. APPLICATION AND CONTENDS THAT EARLIER THE APP EAL WAS FIXED ON 25-2- 2010 WHEN, AT THE REQUEST IT WAS ADJOURNED TO 15-5- 2010. ON 7-5-2010 WHEN THE ASSESSEE CHECKED THE CAUSE LIST OF E BENCH OF THE ITAT, THE APPEAL WAS NOT FOUND LISTED FOR 12-5-2010. THEN THE ASSESSEES REPRESENTATIVE CONTACTED THE REGISTRY ABOUT FIXATION OF APPEAL. LEARNED COU NSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN PURSUING ITS AP PEAL AND DUE TO BONA FIDE MISTAKE THERE COULD BE NO REPRESENTATION ON BEF ORE THE ITAT ON THE APPOINTED DATE. IN SUPPORT, AFFIDAVIT OF ONE MAHEND RA VICHARE HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. LEARNED COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT IN VIEW OF ABOVE AND IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, ITAT EX PARTE OR DER DATED 12-5--2010 PASSED 2 IN THE ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEAL MAY BE RECALLED, FOR DECISION AFRESH, ON MERITS, AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF B EING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE LEARNED D.R. OPPOSED THE MOVE. HE, HOWEVER, COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE AFORESAID FACTUAL ASPECT OF THE MATT ER. 4. AFTER CAREFULLY CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF T HE PARTIES WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFF ICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE APPOINTED DATE . ACCORDINGLY, WE RECALL TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 12-5-2010 PASSED IN ITA NO. 3905/DEL/09 AND RESTORE THE SAME TO ITS ORIGINAL NUMBER. THE APPEA L IS LISTED FOR HEARING ON 19-04-2011. BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE BEEN INTIMATED OF THE DATE FIXED IN OPEN COURT AND THERE IS NO NECESSITY TO ISSUE SEPARATE N OTICES OF HEARING TO THE PARTIES. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS ALLO WED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 04-02-2011. SD/- SD/- ( SHAMIM YAHYA ) ( R.P. TOLANI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 04-02-2011. MP COPY TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 3