Sri.M.J.Mathew & Sons, Chengannur V. ITO, Thiruvalla

MA 56/COCH/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8628 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 18-06-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIMANYU SINGH YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: K NARAYANAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN, JM AND B.R.BASKAR AN, AM M.P. NO. 56/COCH/2012 (ARSG. OUT OF I.T.A. NO.537/COCH/2010) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 M/S. M.J.MATHEW & SONS, COURT ROAD, CHENGANNUR [PAN: AACFM 0371Q] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, THIRUVALLA. (ASSESSEE -APPLICANT) (REVENUE- RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY SHRI K.NARAYANAN, CA REVENUE BY SHRI ABHIMANYU SINGH YADAV, JR. DR DATE OF HEARING 20/07/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 20/07/2012 O R D E R PER B.R.BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: BY FILING THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, THE ASSESSE E SEEKS RECALL OF THE ORDER DATED 18-04-2012 PASSED IN HIS HANDS BY THE TRIBUNAL IN T HE APPEAL CITED ABOVE. 2. THE LD. COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMI TTED THAT THE APPEAL WAS POSTED FOR THE FIRST TIME ON 01-03-2012 AND ON THAT DATE, THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT. ACCORDINGLY, T HE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 18-04- 2012. THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS UNDER AN ERRONEOUS IMPRESSION THAT IT WOULD BE RECEIVING ANOTHER NOTICE FROM THE TRIBUNAL AND HENCE, IT DID NOT MAKE ANY ARRANGEMENT TO APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 18 -04-2012 ON WHICH DATE THE CASE WAS HEARD EX PARTE. THE LD. COUNSEL FURTHER SUBMIT TED THAT THE NON-APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING WAS A WILFUL ONE AND ACCORDINGLY, P LEADED FOR RECALL OF THE EX PARTE ORDER. M.P. NO.56/COCH/2012 2 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR. IT IS ALSO A WELL SET TLED PRINCIPLE THAT THE PARTIES TO THE APPEAL DO NOT HAVE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO SEEK AD JOURNMENT. THE BENCH NORMALLY GRANTS ADJOURNMENT AFTER CONSIDERING VARIOUS FACTOR S. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN GRANTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE AND IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ASSESSEE TO ASCERTAIN THE POSTING DATE FROM THE REGISTRY. HOWEVER, WE NOTICE THAT THE APPEAL WAS FIRST POSTED ONLY ON 01-3-2012 AND HENCE THE VIEW ENTERTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE FOUND FAULT WITH. HENCE, HA VING REGARD TO THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON- APPEARANCE. ACCORDINGLY, BY INVOKING THE POWERS VE STED IN THE TRIBUNAL UNDER RULE 24 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (RULES), 1963, WE RECALL THE ORDER DATED 18-04-2012. 4. WE ALSO DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO POST THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 27-08-2012 . SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING WAS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES, THEY NOTE THAT THE REGISTRY SHALL NOT SEND SEPARATE NOTICE OF HEARING TO THEM, I.E, THE INSTANT ORDER IS ALSO TREATED AS THE NOTIC E OF HEARING. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED ACCORDINGLY O N 20-07-2012 SD/- SD/- (N.R.S.GANESAN) (B.R.BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE: KOCHI DATED: 20TH JULY, 2012 GJ COPY TO: 1. M/S. M.J.MATHEW & SONS, COURT ROAD, CHENGANNUR. 2.THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, THIRUVALLA. 3.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-I, TRIVAN DRUM. 4.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TRIVANDRUM. 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) I.T.A.T, COCHIN M.P. NO.56/COCH/2012 3