Arkema Peroxides India Private Ltd., CHENNAI V. Addl. CIT, CHENNAI

MA 59/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0483 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 28-06-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 28-06-2013
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 11-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S DASGUPTA JT
• Assessee Lawyers: R VE NKATANARAYANAN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : CHENNAI [BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER] M.P.NOS.58 TO 60/MDS/2013 [IN I.T.A.NOS.2039, 2040 & 2041/MDS/2012] ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2004-05, 2005-06 AND 2007-08 M/S ARKEMA PEROXIDES INDIA PVT. LTD 1 ST FLOOR, BALMER LAURIE HOUSE 628, ANNA SALAI, TEYNAMPET CHENNAI - 18 VS THE ADDL. CIT COMPANY RANGE I CHENNAI [PAN AAACE 1713 F ] (PETITIONER) (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI R. VENKATANARAYANAN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S. DAS GUPTA, JT. CIT DATE OF HEARING : 28-06-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28-06-2013 O R D E R PER N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THESE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE TRIB UNAL, PASSED EX- PARTE QUA ASSESSEE, DATED 6.2.2013 IN I.T.A.NOS. 2 039, 2040 & 2041/MDS/2012, FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05, 2005-0 6 AND 2007-08. 2. IN THE PETITIONS THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING FROM THE TRIBUNAL WAS SENT TO SHRI S. HARIH ARAN, PARTNER OF PKF MP NOS.58 TO 60/13 :- 2 -: SRIDHAR & SANTHANAM, WHO WAS TO BRIEF AND HAND OVER THE APPEAL PAPERS TO THE ADVOCATES. AS SHRI S. HARIHARAN WAS ON HIS KASI YATRA FROM 4.2.2013, THE BRIEFING COULD NOT BE DONE AND C ONSEQUENTLY, THE ADVOCATES COULD NOT PUT IN APPEARANCE BEFORE THE TR IBUNAL ON 6.2.2013. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE NON-APP EARANCE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WAS NEITHER WILLFUL NOR WANTON, AND THEREFORE, PRAYED FOR RECALLING OF THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL TO REN DER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE LD. DR HAD NO OBJECTION TO RECALLING THE ORD ER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 6.2.2013 AND HEARING THE APPEALS ON MERITS. 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSES SEE, WE FIND THAT THE REASON EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IS A PLAUSIBLE ONE. THE DR HAD NO OBJECTION TO RECALLING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DA TED 6.2.2013 AND HEARING THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS. WE , THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, RECALL OUR CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 6.2.2013 PASSED IN I.T.A.NOS.2039,2040 & 2041/MDS/2012 AND DIRECT T HE REGISTRY TO LIST THE APPEALS FOR HEARING ON 19.8.2013. BOTH THE PA RTIES WERE INFORMED IN THE COURT ABOUT THE DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEA LS AND HENCE, ISSUE OF NOTICE OF HEARING IS DISPENSED WITH. MP NOS.58 TO 60/13 :- 3 -: 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING ON FRIDAY, THE 28 TH OF JUNE, 2013, AT CHENNAI SD/- SD/- (S. S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER (N.S.SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 28 TH JUNE, 2013 RD COPY TO: PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR