Mehul Ratilal Shah, Bangalore V. Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, Bangalore

MA 6/BANG/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2736 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 26-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P DHIVAHAR
• Assessee Lawyers: H N KHINCHA

Judgement Text

1 M.P. NO.6/BANG/201 5 IN THE IN C O M E T A X A P P E LL A TE T R IBU N A L B A NG AL ORE B E N C H A B E FORE SH R I N.V. V A SU D E V A N , J UDI C I A L M EM B E R A ND SH R I JA SON P . B O A Z , A CC OUNT A NT M E M B E R M.P. NO. 6/BANG/201 5 (IN C.O. NO. 60/BANG/2014 ) (A SS E S S MENT Y E A R : 20 10 - 11 ) SHRI MEHUL RATILAL SHAH, 146/14/6, TOOLS ENGINEERING CO., NIJAGUNAGOWDA INDL. ESTATE, SAJEEPALYA, BANGALORE - 560 091 V S . DY. COMMISSIONER OF IN C OME T A X, CIRCLE 2 ( 1 ) , B A N GA L O R E . PETITIONER A PP E L L A NT R E S P ONDE N T . PETITIONER BY : SHRI H.N. KHINCHA, C.A. R E S P ONDE N T BY : S H R I P. DHIVAHAR, JCIT (D.R) D AT E OF H E A R I NG : 6. 2.2015. D AT E OF P R ONOU N C EMENT : 6.2. 2015 . O R D E R P E R S H RI JA S ON P BO A Z , A . M . : T H I S APPLICATION U/S.254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT ) HAS BEEN FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE SEEKI NG RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN C.O. NO. 60/BANG/2014 DT.24.10.2014 DISMISSING THE ASS ESSEE S CROSS OBJECTIONS ( C.O. ). 2 M.P. NO.6/BANG/201 5 2 . IT IS STATED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER THAT NON - APPEARANCE OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE OF HEARING ON 7.10.2014 WAS DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE NOTICE FOR THE HEARING WAS RECEIVED ON 4.9.2014 IN THE ASSESSEE S OFFICE BY ONE MS. MALATHI, ACCOUNTS ASSISTANT. IN THE AFFIDAVIT DT.24.12.2014 SWORN TO BY MS. MALATI, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT SHE HAD LEFT THE NOTICE IN HER OFFICE DRAWER AND IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER PROCEEDED ON LEAVE FOR A FEW DAYS AND THEREAFTER LOST SIGHT OF THE HEARING NOTICE. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT ONLY AFTER RECEIPT OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DT.7.10.2014, DISMISSING THE ASSESSEE S C.O. THAT MS. MALATHI ON ENQUIRIES BEING MADE IN THIS REGARD BY THE EMPLOYER , RETRACED THE NOTICE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IT IS IN VIEW OF THE MISPLACEMENT OF THE NOTICE FOR HEARING ON 7.10.2014 BY THE ACCOUNTS ASSISTANT MS. MALATHI THAT TH E AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PETITIONER COULD NOT ATTEND ON THE DATE OF HEARING . THUS ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE THE ABSENCE OF THE LEARNED A.R. WAS NEITHER INTENTIONAL NOR WILFUL AND PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DT.7.10.2014 B E RECALLED FOR FRESH HEARING. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE WAS ALSO HEARD. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE ARE SATISFIED WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ABSENCE OF THE LD. A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE H E A RING SCHEDULED FOR 7.10.2014 WAS NEITHER INTENTIONAL NOR WILFUL BUT WAS DUE TO CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WE RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL 3 M.P. NO.6/BANG/201 5 DT. 24.10.2014 IN C.O. NO.60/BANG/2014. THE ORDER IN RESPECT OF REVEN UE S APPEAL IN ITA NO.1604/BANG/2013 DT.24.10.2014 FOR A.Y. 2010 - 11 IS NOT DISTURBED AND REMAINS INTACT. 4. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE C.O. NO.60/BANG/2014 FOR HEARING IN THE NORMAL COURSE BY ISSUE OF NOTICE TO BOTH PARTIES. 5 . I N T HE R E S U L T , T HE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS ALLOWED. O R D E R P R ONOUN C ED I N TH E O P EN C O U RT ON 6 TH FEB., 2015 . SD/ - SD/ - ( N.V. V A S UD E V A N ) ( JA S ON P BO A Z ) J UD I C I A L M EMB E R AC C OUN T A NT M EMBER * R EDDY G P C O P Y T O : 1 . A PP E L L A NT 2. R E S P O NDE N T 3. C . I . T. 4. C IT ( A ) 5. D R , ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GU A R D F I L E. ( T R UE C O P Y) BY O R D E R A SS T . R E G I S T R A R, IT A T, B A N G AL O R E