IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R. SOOD, A.M AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM MISC. APPLICATION NO. 56/CHD/2012 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 1096/CHD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 CROWN MILK SPECIALITIES V D.C.I.T. C-6(1) PVT LTD. MOHALI MOHALI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI AJAY JAIN RESPONDENT BY: SHRI J.S.NAGAR DATE OF HEARING 14.6.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 19.6.2013 O R D E R PER T.R.SOOD, A.M THIS MISC. APPLICATION IS FILED AGAINST THE ORDER O F THE TRIBUNAL DATED 5.3.2012 IN ITA NO. 1096/CHD/2011. 2. THROUGH THIS MISC. APPLICATION THE ASSESSEE HAS SOUGHT RECALLING OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 1 096/CHD/2011. 3 THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE CARRIED US THROUG H THE CONTENTS OF THE MISC. APPLICATION DATED 26.5.2012 A ND SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SHRI T.N. SINGLA COULD NOT APPEAR ON THE APPOINTED DATE FOR HEARING BECAUSE HE WAS AWAY TO JAIPUR IN CONNECTION WITH MARRIAGE CERE MONY OF HIS FRIENDS DAUGHTER. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DEPRIVED OF OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING, THE ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4 ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE STR ONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND SUBMITTED T HAT THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE APPEAL HAS BEEN ADJUDICATED ON MERITS AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT BE SAID TO HAVE ANY GRIEVANCE. IN ANY CASE NO ERROR HAS BEEN POINTED O UT IN THE 2 ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND THEREFORE, THE SAME COULD NOT BE RECTIFIED. 5 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS CAREFULLY. T HE MISC. APPLICATION DATED 26.5.2012 READS AS UNDER: CMSPL/ITAT/2011-12 26.05.2012 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH A CHANDIGARH SUBJECT: MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION U/S 254(2) IN TH E CASE OF M/S CROWN MILK SPECIALTIES PVT LTD, CHANDIGARH (PAN AAA CC3806B) VS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 6(1), MOHALI ITA NO. 1096/CHD/2011 FOR AY 2007-08 (REVISED) HONBLE SIR / MADAM 1. THE ABOVE MENTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN DISMISSED VI DE ORDER DATED 05.03.2012 BY THE HONBLE BENCH ON THE GROUND THAT NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT. 2. THAT WE HAVE APPOINTED M/S KANSAL SINGLA ASSOCIA TES, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, AS OUR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE. THEY HAVE NOT ATTENDED THE PROCEEDINGS ON 15.02.2012 DUE TO THE F ACT THAT SHRI. T.N. SINGLA WHO IS HANDLING THIS CASE, WAS AWAY TO JAIPUR IN CONNECTION WITH MARRIAGE CEREMONIES OF HIS FRIENDS DAUGHTER. 3. THERE IS NO INTENTIONAL FAULT ON THE PART OF THE APPELLANT IN PURSUING THE CASE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER DA TED 05.03.2012 MAY BE RECALLED AS THE COMPANY IS INTERESTED IN PURSUING T HE APPEAL, WE ALSO ASSURE YOUR HONOUR THAT WE SHALL TAKE CARE IN FUTUR E. THANKING YOU YOURS SINCERELY FOR CROWN MILK SPECIALTIES PVT LTD. SD/- TARESM KANSAL MANAGING DIRECTOR 6 ON PERUSAL OF THIS MISC. APPLICATION AND OTHER RE LEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT NO ERROR HAS BEEN POINTED OUT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. MERELY BECAUSE THE AS SESSEE COULD NOT REPRESENT BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WOULD NOT RENDER THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL ERRONEOUS. THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED ON MERITS AND ADJUDICA TED ACCORDINGLY. AS NO ERROR HAS BEEN POINTED OUT IN T HE ORDER OF 3 THE TRIBUNAL, THE SAME COULD NOT BE RECALLED TO GIV E SECOND ROUND OF HEARING BECAUSE THAT WOULD AMOUNT TO REVIE W OF THE ORDER WHICH IS NOT PERMISSIBLE UNDER THE LAW. ACCO RDINGLY THIS MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS REJECTED. 7. IN THE RESULT, MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19.6.2013 SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (T.R. SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 19.6.2013 SURESH COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT/THE C IT(A)/THE DR