Shri Rajendra Kumar Kaushik, Ghaziabad V. ITO, Ghaziabad

MA 495/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0383 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 21-10-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SRUJAN MOHANTY
• Assessee Lawyers: R P MALL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH E NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MISC. APPLICATION NO.495/DEL/2010 IN I.T.A. NO. 1999/DEL/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 SHRI RAJENDRA KUMR KAUSHIK, ITO, 46-SUCHITRA COMPLEX, WARD-2 (2), AMBEDKAR ROAD, GHAZIABAD. V. GHAZIABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN /GIR/NO. PAN /GIR/NO. PAN /GIR/NO. PAN /GIR/NO.AOBPK AOBPK AOBPK AOBPK- -- -4450 4450 4450 4450- -- -K KK K APPELLANT BY : SHRI R.P. MALL, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENT BY : SMT. SRUJAN MOHANTY, SR. DR. ORDER PER A.K. GARODIA, AM: THIS MISC. APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SEEKING R ECALL OF THE EX PARTE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 10.12.2009. IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE M.A. THAT DATE OF HEARING WAS DULY NOTED BY THE ASSESSEE B UT BY MISTAKE, LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE MR. ANIL SHARMA, ADVOCATE NOTED IN HIS DIARY THAT F BENCH IS NOT FUNCTIONING DURING THE WEEK COMMENCING FROM 7.12.2009 T O 10.12.2009 AND FOR THIS REASON, THE NAME OF THIS CASE WAS STRUCK OUT FROM THE DIARY AND NONE ATTENDED ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING I.E. 10.12.2009 BUT IN FA CT, F BENCH WAS FUNCTIONING ON THIS DATE AND FOR THIS REASON, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APP EAR ON THE DATE FIXED FOR PAGE 2 OF 3 MA. NO495/DEL/10 HEARING AND HENCE, THIS EX PARTE TRIBUNAL ORDER SHOULD BE RECALLED AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE DECIDED ON MERIT AFTER HEARING BOTH SIDES. 2. IN THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE US, LD AR OF THE ASSES SEE REITERATED THE SAME ARGUMENTS. LD DR OF THE REVENUE STRONGLY OPPOSED TO RECALL ING OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER AND SUBMITTED THAT SINCE DATE OF HEARING WAS IN THE KNOW LEDGE OF THE ASSESSEE, THERE IS NO SATISFACTORY REASON FOR NON ATTENDANCE OF T HE ASSESSEE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH SIDES BUT WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE BECA USE OF MISTAKE BY THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE MR. ANIL SHARMA, ADVOCATE IN THE WRONG NOTING IN HIS DIARY THAT F BENCH IS NOT FUNCTIONING ON 10.12.2009. WE, THEREFORE, RECALL THIS EX PARTE TRIBUNAL ORDER AND FIX THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 7.6.2011. SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING WAS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT, NO SEPARATE NOT ICE OF HEARING IS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 5. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE OF HEARI NG I.E. 4 TH MARCH, 2011. SD/- SD/- (C.L. SETHI) (A.K. GAROD IA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DT. 04.3.2011. HMS COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT (A)-, NEW DELHI. 5. THE DR, ITAT, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER PAGE 3 OF 3 MA. NO495/DEL/10 (ITAT, NEW DELHI).