Sh. Parkash Chand, Kangra V. Income Tax Officer, Palampur

MA 48/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5490 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 28-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHANDER KANTA SR DR

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BE NCH SMC CHANDIGARH !', # BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM M.A. NO. 48/CHD/2018 IN ./ ITA NO. 728/CHD/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2000-01 SHRI PARKASH CHAND VPO LAMBAGAON, JAISINGHPUR, DISTT. KANGRA (HP). VS THE ITO, PALAMPUR, DISTT KANGRA (HP). ./ PAN NO. : ADEPC8184H / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT ! ' / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PARIKSHIT AGGARWAL, CA # ! ' / REVENUE BY : SMT. CHANDERKANTA, SR.DR $ % ! & / DATE OF HEARING : 03.05.2019 '()* ! & / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.05.2019 $%/ ORDER THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961 PRAYING FOR A REC ALL OF THE EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 13.10.2017 IN ITA 728/CHD/2017 WHEREIN THE AS SESSEE'S APPEAL WAS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. THE PRAYER WAS MADE ON THE GR OUND THAT THE DATE OF HEARING WAS INCORRECTLY COMMUNICATED BY THE ASSESSE E TO HIS COUNSEL. SPECIFIC PARA 2 OF THE APPLICATION FILED IS EXTRACTED HEREUN DER FOR READY REFERENCE : 2. THAT IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE COUNSEL WHO WAS TO APPEAR IN THE MATTER HAD BEEN PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE AS THE APPLICANT/APPELLANT COMMUNI CATED TO THE COUNSEL THE DATE OF HEARING AS 26.10.2017 INSTEAD OF 26.09.2017 AND DUE TO THIS REASON THE COUNSEL COULD NOT ATTEND THE PROCEEDINGS ON 26.09.2017. DUE TO THIS REASON THE COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT WAS PREVENTED TO ATTEND THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ON 26.09.2017. 2. CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION, THE LD. SR.DR DID N OT OPPOSE THE PRAYER MADE AND STATED THAT SHE HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE RECALL OF THE ORDER AND A DECISION ON MERITS. M.A. 25/CHD/2019 IN ITA421/CHD/2018 PAGE 2 OF 2 3. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL WAS D ISMISSED IN LIMINE ON THE GROUNDS OF LACK OF REPRESENTATION. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AS ARGUED, I AM SATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION OFFERED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS PLEADED THAT THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS P REVENTED BY SUFFICIENT REASON TO ATTEND THE PROCEEDINGS ON THE DATE FIXED AS THE ASSESSEE INCORRECTLY COMMUNICATED THE DATE OF HEARING TO THE COUNSEL. TH EREFORE, EXERCISING THE POWERS AS VESTED IN ME BY PROVISO TO RULE 24 OF THE ITAT RULES 1963, THE ORDER DATED 13.10.2017 IS RECALLED. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS ANSAL HOUSIN G CONSTRUCTION LTD. 274 ITR 131 (DEL). REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE APPEAL ON 2 ND JULY,2019. FOR THE SAID DATE, NO SPECIFIC NOTICE SHALL BE ISSUED TO THE PAR TIES. SAID ORDER WAS COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 4. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH MAY,2019. SD/- ( !' ) (DIVA SINGH) # / JUDICIAL MEMBER ' ( (+ ! ,- .- / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT - 2. / THE RESPONDENT - 3. $ / / CIT 4. $ / ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. -01 2 , & 2 , 34516 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 15 7% / GUARD FILE (+ $ / BY ORDER, 8 # / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR