M/s. Param Corporation, Baroda V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-2(2), Baroda

MA 56/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8467 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 19-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P BATHEJA
• Assessee Lawyers: S N DIVATIA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

, , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD , !', #$ # % BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KR.SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO.56/AHD/2012 ( ./ IN I.T.A. NO.3827/AHD/2008) ( ( ( ( ( / / / / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) M/S.PARAM CORPORATION C/O HETALBHAI R PATEL 31/B, SOMDUTT PARK NR.RAJESH TOWER GOTRI ROAD BARODA 390 023 / VS. THE ITO WARD-2(2) BARODA ) #$ ./*+ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAHFP 2197 G ( ), / // / APPLICANT ) .. ( -.), / RESPONDENT ) APPLICANT BY : SHRI S.N.DIVATIA, A.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI O.P.BATHEJA, D.R. / 0 '$ / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 29/06/2012 12( 0 '$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 6/7/2012 #3 / O R D E R PER SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : BY THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS REQUESTED FOR RECALLING OF THE ORDER DATED 29/01/2010 PASSED BY T HE ITAT AHMEDABAD BENCH (CAMP AT VADODARA) IN ITA NOS.3827/AHD/08 (A .Y. 2005-06). IN THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED AS UNDER:- 1. THE APPLICANT ABOVE NAMED SUBMITS THIS MISC. APPLIC ATION U/S.254(2) OF THE IT ACT 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT) FOR MA NO.56/AHD/2012 (IN ITA NO.3827/AHD/2008) M/S.PARAM CORPORATION VS. ITO ASST.YEAR - 2005-06 - 2 - RESTORATION OF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLAT E TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD BENCH-, AHMEDABAD, WHICH WAS PASSED EX- PARTE ON 29.01.2010 WHEREBY THE APPEAL OF THE APPLI CANT HAS BEE DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 2. THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT BEING AGGRIEVED AND DISS ATISFIED WITH THE ORDER PASSED U/S.250 ON 18.09.2008 BY CIT( A)-2, BARODA WHEREIN THE APPLICANT HAD CHALLENGED VARIOUS ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCES. 3. THE AFORESAID APPEALS HAVE BEEN DISPOSED OF EX-PART E FOLLOWING THE DECISION IN CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PVT.LTD., ETC., ON THE GROUND THAT THE NOTICE WAS RECEIVED BA CK WITH THE REMARK RTS AND NONE APPEARED ON ITS BEHALF NOR SO UGHT ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE OF HEARING WHICH SHOWS THAT THE APPELLANT WAS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL . 4. THE APPLICANT SUBMIT WITH GREATEST RESPECT THAT THI S APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 23.01.2009 WHEN IT ASKED F OR ADJOURNMENT BY APPLICATION DT. 20.01.2009. THEREAF TER, NO NOTICE OF HEARING WAS RECEIVED/SERVED TO THE APPLIC ANT AND WHEN THE AO INITIATED PROCEEDINGS FOR PENALTY, IT C AME TO THE NOTICE OF THE APPELLANT THAT THE ORDER WAS ALREADY PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL DURING ITS CAMP AT BARODA. THEREFORE, A LETTER DT. 19.12.2011 WAS ADDRESSED TO THE REGISTRAR, ITAT TO SERVE THE ORDER AT THE NEW ADDRESS MENTIONED THEREIN. IT WAS FILED IN HIS OFFICE ON 27.12.2011. THE COPY OF SAID LETTER IS ENCLOSED HEREWITH. LATER ON THE APPLICANT VIDE LETTER DT. 9 .01.2012 AUTHORIZED SHRI S N DIVATIA TO COLLECT THE SAID ORD ER ON ITS BEHALF AND ACCORDINGLY IT WAS SERVED UPON HIM ON 21 .02.2012. HENCE, THE PRESENT APPLICATION IS BEING FILED NOW. 5. THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT AS NOTED IN THE SAID ORD ER, THERE WAS ADMITTEDLY NO SERVICE OF THE NOTICE OF HEARING SO THAT THERE COULD NOT BE ANY COMPLIANCE OF THE DATE OF HE ARING FIXED ON 27.01.2010. 6. THE APPLICANT HAD ALREADY SUBMITTED DETAIL, STATEME NT OF FACTS AND OTHER PAPERS BY LETTER DT. 22.11.2008 THROUGH S PEED POST ON 22.11.2008. THUS, THE APPLICANT WAS VERY MUCH A NXIOUS TO CONDUCT THE APPEAL. 7. IN VIEW OF ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE APPLI CANT SUBMITS THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUN AL SHOULD MA NO.56/AHD/2012 (IN ITA NO.3827/AHD/2008) M/S.PARAM CORPORATION VS. ITO ASST.YEAR - 2005-06 - 3 - BE RECALLED AND THE APPEAL SHOULD BE FIXED FOR FRES H HEARING FOR DISPOSAL ON MERITS, OTHERWISE IT WOULD CAUSE GR EAT INJUSTICE AND HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANT WITHOUT ANY CAUSE ATTRIBUTABLE TO IT. 8. NEEDLESS TO SAY FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE APPLI CANT AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL FOR EVER PRAY AND REMAIN GRATEFUL. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, WE AGREE WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSES SEE THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR ASSESSEES FAILURE TO APPEAR B EFORE THE ITAT ON THE DATE OF HEARING. ACCORDINGLY, WE RECALL THE ORDER OF THE ITAT AHMEDABAD BENCH (CAMP AT VADODARA) PASSED IN ITA NO.3827/AHD/2008 (A.Y.2005-06) DATED 29/01/2010 AN D DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO FIX THE HEARING OF THIS ASSESSEES APP EAL ON 05 /09/2012 AS PER LAW. BOTH PARTIES WERE INFORMED IN COURT AND THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS DISPENSED WITH THE CONSENT OF BOTH PARTIES. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. SD/- SD/- ( !' ) ( ) #$ ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) ( MUKU L KR. SHRAWAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 6/ 7 /2012 4'.., .../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS MA NO.56/AHD/2012 (IN ITA NO.3827/AHD/2008) M/S.PARAM CORPORATION VS. ITO ASST.YEAR - 2005-06 - 4 - #3 0 -5 6#5( #3 0 -5 6#5( #3 0 -5 6#5( #3 0 -5 6#5(/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ), / THE APPLICANT-ASSESSEE 2. -.), / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 7 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 7() / THE CIT(A)-II, BARODA 5. 5:; - , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. ;< =/ / GUARD FILE. #3 #3 #3 #3 / BY ORDER, .5 - //TRUE COPY// > >> >/ // / * * * * ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION (COPIED MATTER) ON 4.7.2012 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 4.7.2012 OTHER MEMBER 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S 6.7.12 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 6.7.12 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER