IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM & SHRI M.BA LAGANESH, AM ] M.A.NO.59/KOL/2016 (A/O I.T.A NO. 660/KOL/2011) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2002-0 3 D.C.I.T., CIRCL-6, . -VS.- GREAT WALL MARK ETING (P)LTD KOLKATA KOLKATA [PAN : AACCG 0768 Q] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : SHRI SALLONG YADEN, ADDL. CIT(DR) FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI S.M.SURANA, ADVOCA TE DATE OF HEARING : 09.12.2016. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 9.12.2016. ORDER PER N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM THIS IS A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE R EVENUE U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT PRAYING THAT THE EXPARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATE D 03.02.2016 SHOULD BE RECALLED AND THE APPEAL SHOULD BE HEARD AFRESH AFTER DUE OPPORTU NITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE REVENUE. 2. THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WAS LISTED FOR HEA RING ON 22.01.2016. ON THAT DATE NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE DEPARTMENT NOR WAS THERE ANY REQUEST FOR AN ADJOURNMENT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES THE TRIBUNAL PROCEEDED TO HEAR THE APPEAL AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO REASONS FOR NON APPEARANCE OF THE DEPARTMENT WHEN T HE APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING HAS BEEN STATED. UNDER THE PROVISO TO RULE 24 OF T HE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES 1963 WHEN THE APPEAL IS CALLED FOR HEARING AND THE APPEL LANT DOES NOT APPEAR IN PERSON OR THROUGH THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE WHEN THE APPE AL IS CALLED ON FOR HEARING, THE TRIBUNAL MAY DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERITS AFTER HEARING THE RESPONDENT. IF THE APPELLANT APPEARS AFTERWARDS AND SATISFIES THE TRIB UNAL THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR HIS NON APPEARANCE, WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED ON F OR HEARING, THE TRIBUNAL SHALL MAKE 2 M.A.NO.59/KOL/2016 (A/O ITA NO.660/KOL/2011) GREAT WALL MARKETING (P)LTD. A.YR.2002-03 2 AN ORDER SETTING ASIDE THE EX PARTE ORDER AND RESTO RE THE APPEAL. WE HAVE ALREADY MENTIONED THAT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE DOES NOT STATE SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON APPEARANCE OF THE APPELLAN T WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED ON FOR HEARING. 3. THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WAS LISTED F OR HEARING ON 15.07.2016. IT WAS POINTED OUT BY THE BENCH TO THE LD. DR THAT THE MIS CELLANEOUS APPLICATION DOES NOT GIVE ANY SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON APPEARANCE AND THE DEP ARTMENT WAS DIRECTED TO MODIFY ITS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION. THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED T O 26.08.2016. ON 26.08.2016 THE REVENUE HAD NOT COMPLIED WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF THE BENCH GIVEN ON 15.07.2016. AS A LAST OPPORTUNITY THE REVENUE WAS GIVEN TIME TO COMP LY WITH THE DIRECTIONS DATED 15.07.21016 AND THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WAS A DJOURNED TO 23.09.2016. ON 23.09.2016 AGAIN AN OPPORTUNITY WAS SOUGHT BY THE D EPARTMENT AND THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 04.11.2016. ON 04.11.2016 THE BENCH DI D NOT FUNCTION AND THE CASE WAS ACCORDINGLY ADJOURNED TODAY I.E. 09.12.2016. EVEN T ODAY THE REVENUE HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 15.07.201 6. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE REVENUE DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED AS THE REVENUE HAS NOT MADE OUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR I TS NON APPEARANCE WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED ON FOR HEARING ON 22.01.2016. THE MISCEL LANEOUS APPLICATION IS THEREFORE DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION O F THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 9.12.2016. SD/- SD/- [M.BALAGANESH] [ N.V.VASUDEVAN ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 9.12.2016. [RG PS] 3 M.A.NO.59/KOL/2016 (A/O ITA NO.660/KOL/2011) GREAT WALL MARKETING (P)LTD. A.YR.2002-03 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1.GREAT WALL MARKETING (P)LTD., 7, SWALLOW LANE, KO LKATA-700001. 2D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-6, KOLKATA. 3. CIT(A)-VI, KOLKATA 4. C.I.T.- II, KOLKATA. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSTT.REGISTRAR, ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES