Raghav Industries Limited, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

MA 6/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8000 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-04-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 20-04-2012
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 05-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: G S SIVAKUMAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI [BEFORE SHRI N.S.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER] M.P.NOS.6,7, & 8/MDS/2012 [IN I.T.A NOS.1874, 1875 & 1876/MDS/2011] ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2005-06 TO 2007-08 RAGHAV INDUSTRIES LTD S-1 NOS. 8, POES ROAD TEYNAMPET CHENNAI 600 018 VS THE ACIT COMPANY CIRCLE V(3) CHENNAI [PAN AAACR 4686 C] (PETITIONER) (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI G.S.SIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB., ADDL CIT DATE OF HEARING : 20-4-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20-4-2012 O R D E R PER N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THESE ARE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATE D 7.2.2012 PASSED IN I.T.A.NO.S1874 TO 1876/MDS/2011 IN ASSESSMENT YE ARS 2005-06 TO 2007-08. 2. IN THESE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS THE ASSESSEE H AS SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS DISMISSED THE APPEA LS OF THE ASSESSEE MP NOS. 6,7&8 /12 :- 2 -: FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PRESENT O N THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 7.2.2012 IN SP ITE OF NOTICE OF HEARING SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE ON 25.11.2011 AS EV IDENCED BY THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD OF THE POST OFFICE PLACED ON R ECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING W AS RECEIVED BY A CLERK WORKING IN THE OFFICE OF THE ASSESSEE IN CHE NNAI. ALL ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE CARRIED ON IN COIMBATORE. THE CL ERK, WHO RECEIVED THE NOTICE, FAILED TO SEND THE SAME TO COIMBATORE O FFICE AND DUE TO THIS INADVERTENT MISTAKE ON THE PART OF THE CLERK, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR ON THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED BY THE TRIB UNAL. 3. WE FIND THAT THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT PUTTING IN APPEARANCE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DA TE OF HEARING FIXED ON 7.2.2012 TO BE A PLAUSIBLE ONE. HENCE, WE RECAL L OUR ORDER DATED 7.2.2012 PASSED IN I.T.A.NOS.1874 TO 1876/MDS/2011 IN ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 TO 2007-08 AND RESTORE THE APPEALS BA CK TO THEIR ORIGINAL NUMBER. THE APPEALS ARE FIXED FOR HEARING ON 20.6.2012. BOTH THE PARTIES ARE INFORMED IN THE OPEN COURT, HE NCE, NOTICE OF HEARING IS DISPENSED WITH. MP NOS. 6,7&8 /12 :- 3 -: 4. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20.4.2012 SD/- SD/- (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER (N.S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 20 TH APRIL, 2012 RD COPY TO: 1. PETITIONER 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR