Japan Airlines Ltd, New Delhi V. CIT, New Delhi

MA 570/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7526 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 28-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS ANUSHA KHURANA
• Assessee Lawyers: MRS RAJANI MAHA JAN
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH FRIDAY : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MISC. APPLICATION NOS. 570 & 571/DEL/2010 (IN I.T.A. NOS. 4172/DEL/2005 & 2861/DEL/2007) ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S. JAPAN AIRLINES INTERNATIONAL CO. LTD., INCOME -TAX OFFICER, CHANDRALOK BUILDING, VS. WARD 50(2), NEW DELHI . 36, JANPATH, NEW DELHI. TAN: DELJO4251C (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : MRS. RAJANI MAHA JAN, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENT BY : MRS. ANU SHA KHURANA, SR. DR. O R D E R PER I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER VIDE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED AS ABOVE, THE ASSESSEE HAS SOUGHT RECALL OF EX PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DAT ED 15 TH NOVEMBER, 2010 IN ITA NOS.4172/DEL/2005 & 2861/DEL/2007. THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE DISMISSED IN LIMINE BY WAY OF EX PART E ORDER ON ACCOUNT OF FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT THE APPEALS ON 15 TH NOVEMBER, 2010. 2. IN THE MISC. APPLICATION IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED T HAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING THOUGH WAS DATED 6 TH OCTOBER, 2010, BUT IT WAS DISPATCHED ONLY ON 11 TH NOVEMBER, 2010 AND WAS DELIVERED ON 12 TH NOVEMBER, 2010 AT THE 2 OFFICE OF THE COMPANY. DUE TO INTERVENING WEEKEND THE SAID NOTICE CAME TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE MANAGEMENT OF THE COMPANY ONLY ON 15 TH NOVEMBER, 2010, WHEN INFORMATION WAS GIVEN TO MS RAJNI MAHAJA N, WHO WAS HANDLING THE AFOREMENTIONED CASE. IT WAS TRANSPIRED THAT TH E SAID COUNSEL OF THE COMPANY WAS SICK WITH HIGH FEVER AND THEREFORE, COU LD NOT ATTEND THE HEARING. THEREFORE, IT IS STATED THAT THERE WAS RE ASONABLE AND SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE OF THE COUNSEL ON THE FIXED DATE OF HEARING. THE FACTS MENTIONED IN THE APPLICATION ARE ALSO SUPPORTED BY THE AFFIDAVIT. 3. IN THIS VIEW OF THE SITUATION, AFTER HEARING BOT H THE PARTIES AND AFTER CONSIDERING THEIR SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE SATISFIED THA T THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE FIX ED DATE OF HEARING. THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE OUR AFORE-MENTIONED ORDER A ND RESTORE THESE APPEALS FOR HEARING AFRESH. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FI X THESE APPEALS IN REGULAR COURSE AND INFORM THE PARTIES. 4. THE MISC. APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED IN THE MANNER AFORESAID. 5. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6 TH JANUARY, 2012. SD/- SD/- (B.C. MEENA) (I.P. BANSAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 6 TH JANUARY, 2012. 3 M.A. NOS.570 & 571/DEL/2010 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR BY ORDER *MG DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT.