Sh. Neeraj Chhabra, Ludhiana V. ACIT, Ludhiana

MA 48/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4900 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 28-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 04-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NO.48/CHD/2016 IN ITA NO.795/CHD/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) SH.NEERAJ CHHABRA, VS. THE A.C.I.T., C/O M/S CHHABRA FORGINGS, CIRCLE-V, SUA ROAD, DHANDARI KALAN, LUDHIANA. LUDHIANA. PAN: AATPC8002F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI AMARJIT KAMBOJ RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K. MITTAL DATE OF HEARING : 28.10.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.10.2016 O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M . : THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE APPLICANT FOR RECALLING OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNA L DATED 15.3.2016 PASSED IN ITA NO.795/CHD/2015 WHEREBY THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR NON APPEARANCE. 2. THE REASON GIVEN BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR NON- APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING ON 15.3.2016, WAS THAT THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT HAD TO GO TO DELHI 2 DUE TO THE SUDDEN DEMISE OF HIS CLOSE RELATIVE. TH E LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED THAT AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS SENT TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR DATED 9.3.2016 THROUGH DTDC EXPRESS LTD., A COURIER COMPANY, WHICH WAS DELIVERED ON 10.3.2016 I .E. FIVE DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE COPY OF ADJOURNM ENT APPLICATION DATED 9.3.2016, COURIER RECEIPT OF DISP ATCH AND EVIDENCE OF DELIVERY BY THE COURIER, ATTACHED ALONGWITH THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION. THE LEARN ED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER STATED THAT IT HAD REGULARLY ATTENDED THE PREVIOUS DATE OF HEARING. T HE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, STATED THAT ITS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BE ACCEPTED AND THE APPEA L OF THE ASSESSEE BE RESTORED. 3. CONSIDERING THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND THAT THE APPEAL OF THE APPLICANT HAS NOT BEEN DECID ED ON MERITS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE APPLICANT HAS B EEN ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON APPEARANCE. THEREFORE, ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY COULD BE GIVEN TO T HE APPLICANT TO ARGUE THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 4. WE ACCORDINGLY, RECALL THE EARLIER ORDER DATED 15.3.2016 AND RESTORE THE APPEAL OF THE APPLICANT. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE APPEAL FOR FINAL HE ARING ON 26.12.2016, FOR WHICH DATE NO SEPARATE NOTICE WILL BE ISSUED TO THE APPLICANT. 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FI LED BY THE APPLICANT IS ALLOWED IN TERMS ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 28 TH OCTOBER, 2016 *RATI* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH