M/s Asia Investment Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

MA 581/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6383 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 30-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMRENDRA KUMAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A NEW DELHI (FRIDAY) BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI B.C. MEENA M.A. NO. 581/DEL/2010 ( IN ITA NO. 757/DEL/10 ) ASSTT. YR: 2003-04 M/S ASIA INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. VS. INCOME-TAX OFF ICER, (EARLIER KNOWN AS ANSYSCO LTD.), WARD-1(1), NEW DE LHI. 1, SRI AUROBINDO MARG, NEW DELHI. PAN/GIR NO. AAACA4539K ( APPLICANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) APPLICANT BY : SHRI GAURAV JAIN CA RESPONDENT BY: SH. AMRENDRA KUMAR SR. DR O R D E R PER R.P. TOLANI, J.M : THIS IS ASSESSEES MISC. APPLICATION PRAYING FOR RE CALLING OF ITAT ORDER DATED 9-9-2010 PASSED IN THE ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEAL. 2. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE IN THE MISC. APPLICATION AND CONTENDS THAT EARLIER THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE ITAT ON 21-4-2010 WHEN THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE AND THAT NO NOTICE FIXING THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 9-9-2010 WAS RECEIVED AND FOR THAT REASON THE HEARING COULD NOT BE ATTEND ED ON THAT THAT DATE. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS VERY MUCH INTERESTE D IN PURSUING ITS APPEAL. IN SUPPORT, AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI CHARANJIT SINGH, DIRECTO R OF ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS BEEN FILED. LEARNED COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT IN VIEW OF ABOVE AND IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, EX PARTE ORDER DATED 9-9-2010 PASSED IN THE ABOVE 2 CAPTIONED APPEAL MAY BE RECALLED, FOR DECISION AFRE SH, ON MERITS, AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE LEARNED D.R. OPPOSED THE MOVE. HE, HOWEVER, COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE AFORESAID FACTUAL ASPECT OF THE MATT ER. 4. AFTER CAREFULLY CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF T HE PARTIES WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFF ICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE APPOINTED DATE . ACCORDINGLY, WE RECALL TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 9-9-2010 PASSED IN ITA NO. 7 57/DEL/10 AND RESTORE THE SAME TO ITS ORIGINAL NUMBER. THE APPEAL IS LIS TED FOR HEARING ON 6-7- 2011. BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE BEEN INTIMATED OF THE D ATE FIXED IN OPEN COURT AND THERE IS NO NECESSITY TO ISSUE SEPARATE NOTICES OF HEARING TO THE PARTIES. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS ALLO WED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 13-05-2011. SD/- SD/- ( B.C. MEENA ) ( R.P. TOLANI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 13-05-2011. MP COPY TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 3