Jagdish Lal, Uttar Pradesh V. ITO, Saharanpur

MA 461/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6905 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 20-08-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B R R KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: R K GAUBA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI DELHI DELHI BENCH F BENCH F BENCH F BENCH F : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE SHRI SHRI SHRI SHRI A.D.JAIN, JM AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM A.D.JAIN, JM AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM A.D.JAIN, JM AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM A.D.JAIN, JM AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.461/ 461/ 461/ 461/DEL/201 DEL/201 DEL/201 DEL/2010 00 0 (IN ITA NO.3 (IN ITA NO.3 (IN ITA NO.3 (IN ITA NO.3400 400 400 400/DEL/2009 /DEL/2009 /DEL/2009 /DEL/2009) )) ) ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR : : : : 2003 2003 2003 2003- -- -04 0404 04 SHRI JAGDISH LAL, SHRI JAGDISH LAL, SHRI JAGDISH LAL, SHRI JAGDISH LAL, C/O R.K.GAUBA, ADVOCA C/O R.K.GAUBA, ADVOCA C/O R.K.GAUBA, ADVOCA C/O R.K.GAUBA, ADVOCATE, TE,TE, TE, CHOWK PRATAP MARKET, CHOWK PRATAP MARKET, CHOWK PRATAP MARKET, CHOWK PRATAP MARKET, BHAGAT SINGH MARG, BHAGAT SINGH MARG, BHAGAT SINGH MARG, BHAGAT SINGH MARG, SAHARANPUR SAHARANPUR SAHARANPUR SAHARANPUR 247 001. 247 001. 247 001. 247 001. VS. VS. VS. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD WARD WARD WARD- -- -1, 1,1, 1, SAHARANPUR. SAHARANPUR. SAHARANPUR. SAHARANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI R.K.GAUBA, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B.R.R.KUMAR, SR.DR. ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER A.D.J PER A.D.J PER A.D.J PER A.D.JAIN, JM AIN, JM AIN, JM AIN, JM : : : : VIDE OUR ORDER DATED 1.10.2009, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION, SINCE NONE HAD APPEARED O N BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE NOTICE ISSUED HAD NOT RETURNED UNSERV ED. 2. IN THE PRESENT APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT THE NOTICE MIGHT HAVE BEEN SENT TO THE ASSESSEES ERSTWHILE ADDRESS OF NEHRU MARKET, SAHARANPUR; THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD THE SHOP A T NEHRU MARKET, SAHARANPUR BEFORE THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND IT WAS, THEREFORE, THAT THE NOTICE COUL D NOT BE SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE; THAT IN THE FORM OF APPEAL BEFORE THE TRI BUNAL, THE ADDRESS FOR SERVICE OF NOTICE WAS GIVEN AS JAGDISH LAL, C /O R.K.GAUBA, ADVOCATE, CHOWK PRATAP MARKET, BHAGAT SINGH MARG, S AHARANPUR; AND MA-461/DEL/2010 2 THAT, THE NOTICE WAS NOT SENT AT THIS ADDRESS. AN AFFID AVIT SUPPORTING THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED. 3. THE RECORD HAS BEEN PERUSED IN THE LIGHT OF THE CO NTENTS OF THE APPLICATION. IT IS FOUND THAT INDEED IN COLUMN NO.1 0 IN FORM 36, THE ADDRESS GIVEN IS JAGDISH LAL, C/O R.K.GAUBA, ADVOCATE, CHOWK PRATAP MARKET, BHAGAT SINGH MARG, SAHARANPUR. HOWEVER, TH E NOTICE OF HEARING, IT IS SEEN, WAS SENT AT THE ERSTWHILE ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE I.E. PROP. M/S AMIT FOOTWEARS, NEHRU MARKET, SAHARANP UR. NOW, THE DEFAULT IS NOT ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS SENT AT THE WRONG ADDRESS, TH OUGH THE CHANGE IN ADDRESS WAS DULY INTIMATED TO THE TRIBUNAL. IT WAS, THEREFORE, THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE FROM APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AT THE TIME OF HEARIN G OF THE APPEAL. 4. AS SUCH, THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS FOUND TO BE J USTIFIED AND IS ACCEPTED AS SUCH. OUR ORDER DATED 1.10.2009 IS RECALLED. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS RESTORED TO ITS ORIGINAL NUMBER , IN-SITU. IT SHALL COME UP FOR HEARING ON 8 TH NOVEMBER, 2011, THE DATE ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIE S. ACCORDINGLY, NO FRESH NOTICE OF HEARING WILL BE ISSUED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 19 TH AUGUST, 2011. SD/- SD/- (SHAMIM YAHYA (SHAMIM YAHYA (SHAMIM YAHYA (SHAMIM YAHYA) )) ) (A.D.JAIN (A.D.JAIN (A.D.JAIN (A.D.JAIN) )) ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 19.08.2011. VK. MA-461/DEL/2010 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR