Shankar Sahakari Avas Samiti Ltd., Bareilly V. DCIT, Bareilly

MA 47/LKW/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7574 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 20-01-2012
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2011
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R K RAM
• Assessee Lawyers: K R RASTOGI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI S UNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B. R. JAIN , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M A NO. 47/LKW/2011 [ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 42/LKW/2006] ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001 - 02 SHANKER SAHKARI AVAS SAMITI LIMITED BAREILLY V. DY. CIT CIRCLE 2 , BAREILLY PAN: AAETS9720R (APP LIC ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP LICA NT BY: SHRI. K. R. RASTOGI, C.A. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI. R. K. RAM, D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 20.01.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 2 0 .01.2012 O R D E R PER S UNIL KUMAR YADAV : THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 30.10.2007 PASSED IN ITA NO. 42/LKW/2006 WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT ON THE DATE FIXED I.E. 29.10.2007, THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSE E HAD LEFT LUCKNOW AND DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL . THE COUNSEL EVEN DID NOT INFORM THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO THE DATE OF HEARING. THE TRIBUNAL ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE INSTEAD OF DECIDING IT ON MERITS AND THE A SSESSEE CAME TO KNOW ABOUT THE DISMISSAL OF ITS APPEAL ONLY ON 5.9.2011 THROUGH THE LD. ACIT, RANGE II , BAREILLY DURING THE DEMAND PROCEEDINGS. THEREAFTER THE ASSESSEE OBTAINED THE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 30.10.2007. THE : - 2 - : ORDER DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO NOT SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTIONS , THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT. 2 . THE LD. D.R. FORMALLY OPPOSED THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. 3 . HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND FROM A CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS VIS - - VIS THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, WE FIND THAT THE T RIB U NAL HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE INSTEAD OF DECIDING THE ISSUES ON MERITS. MOREOVER, THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARI NG IS DULY EXPLAINED AND WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MISDEEDS OF ITS COUNSEL. THEREFORE, IN THE INTER E ST OF JUSTICE, WE RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 30.10.2007 AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO FIX THIS APPEA L FOR HEARING ON 5.3.2012. SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING WAS PRONOUNCED DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, NO FRESH NOTICE WILL GO TO THE PARTIES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20.1.2012. (SEE SEPARATE REASONING) SD/ - [B. R. JAIN ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADA V ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 20.1.2012 JJ: 2001 CONTD.3 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPLICANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR : - 3 - : M.A. NO.47/LKW/11 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO.42/LKW/06) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001 - 2002 SHANKER SAHKARI AVAS SAMITI LIMITED, VS. DY. CIT, BAREILLY. CIRCLE - 2, PAN:AAETS9720R BAREILLY. (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) PER B. R. JAIN: THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER DATED 30 TH OCTOBER, 2007 PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN A LLOWED FOR THE REASON THAT THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY ASSESSEE STATING THEREIN THAT THE ADJOURNED DATE OF HEARING I.E. 29/10/2007 WAS NOT INFORMED TO HIM, HAS NOT BEEN OPPOSED BY THE REVENUE AND ALSO THAT THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MERELY DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN L IMINE WITHOUT PASSING ANY ORDER ON THE MERITS OF THE GROUNDS RAISED IN APPEAL. THERE, HOWEVER, HAS BEEN NO AGREEMENT AMONGST THE MEMBERS THAT THE EX - PARTE DECISION WAS A RESULT OF MISDEEDS OF ASSESSEES COUNSEL AS ALSO THE ALLEGATION SO IMPUTED HAS NOT BE EN PROVED BY BRINGING ANY RELIABLE MATERIAL ON RECORD. 2 . IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED AS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20/01/2012. SD/ - ( B. R. JAIN ) ACCOUNTANT ME MBER DATED: 20.1.2012 *SINGH 2301 COPY FORWARDED TO THE: 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CIT (A) 4. CIT 5. DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR