INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, AM & SHRI S.S.VI SWANETHRA RAVI, JM M.A. NO. 55/KOL /2016 [IN I.T A NO. 1644/KOL/2014 A.Y 2007-08] SHRI SUSHIL CHAND SONI VS. ACIT, CIR-41, KOLKATA PAN: ASMPS 0452Q [ APPLICANT ] [ RESPONDENT ] APPLICANT BY : SHRI S.M. SURANA, ADVO CATE, LD.AR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SALLONG YADEN, ADDL.CIT, LD. SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 21-10-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21 -10-2016 ORDER SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 1644/KOL/ 2014 DATED 23-02- 2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. BY THIS MISC. APPLICATION U/S. 254(2) OF THE ACT THE ASSESSEE WANTS TO RECALL THE SAID EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 3. SHRI S.M. SURANA, ADVOCATE, LEARNED AR REPRESENT ED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI SALLONG YADEN, LEARNED ADDL.CI T/SR.DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS PASSED AN EXPARTE ORDER ON 23-02-2016 BEING NON APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE/LD.AR OF THE A SSESSEE ON THE SAID DATE OF HEARING ON 23-02-2016. IT WAS ALSO SUBMIT TED THAT NO NOTICE FIXING THE DATE OF ON 23-02-2016 WAS RECEIVED BY TH E ASSESSEE. THOUGH IT WAS INFORMED THROUGH OFFICE NOTICE BOARD, BUT IT WA S NOT POSSIBLE BY THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF. THUS, THERE WAS SUFFICIENT M.A NO. 55/KOL/16-B-JM SUNIL CHAND SONI 2 REASON IN NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE SAID DATE OF HEARING ON 23-02-2016. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, HE PRAYED BEFORE US THAT THERE WAS NO INTENTIONAL BEING NON APPEARANCE BY THE LD.AR OF TH E ASSESSEE BEFORE THE BENCH ON THE SAID DATE OF HEARING. FINALLY, HE REQU ESTED THE BENCH THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY PLEASE BE GIVEN TO REPRESENT T HE ASSESSEES CASE BY ALLOWING THIS MISC. APPLICATION. 5. IN REPLY, THE LEARNED ADDL.CIT/SR.DR HAS OPPOSE D THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. HE RELIED ON TH E IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 23-02-2016. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIN D THAT THE TRIBUNAL BY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN (I) LTD REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320(DEL), HONBLE MP HIGH COURT IN THE C ASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKJIRAO HOLKARS REPORTED IN 223 ITR 480(MP) , HON BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS REPOR TED IN 296 ITR 495 (P&H) AND HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.BH ATTACHARJEE & ANR REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461) (SC) HAS PASSED AN EX-PART E ORDER BEING NON- APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAID DATE OF HEAR ING. WE FIND THAT NO NOTICE FOR FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING DATED 23-02-2 016 WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. THERE WAS NO INTENTIONAL BEING NON-APPEAR ANCE ON THE SAID DATE OF HEARING OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, HE AND HIS L D. AR COULD NOT APPEAR ON THE DATE OF HEARING ON 23-02-2016 AS FIX ED BY THE TRIBUNAL. WE FURTHER FIND THAT NON APPEARANCE ON THE DATE O F HEARING WAS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE AS NO NOT ICE OF SUCH HEARING WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. THUS, THERE WAS REASONAB LE CAUSE OF THE ASSESSEE IN NOT APPEARING ON THE DATE OF HEARING. WE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY, RECALL THE SAID ORDER OF TH E TRIBUNAL. REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE CASE AFRESH ON 22-11-16 . ACCORDINGLY, BOTH THE PARTIES ARE INFORMED. M.A NO. 55/KOL/16-B-JM SUNIL CHAND SONI 3 7. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21-10-2016 SD/- SD/- P.M.JAGTAP S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 21-10-2016 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPLICANT :SHRI SUSHIL CHAND SONI 28 BARRACKPORE TRUNK ROAD, KOLKATA-700 002. 2 RESPONDENT : A.C.I.T, CIR-41, KOLKATA. 3 . CIT, 4 . CIT(A), 5 . DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA **PP/SPS TRUE COPY] BY ORDER, ASSTT REGISTRAR.