Mr. Anwar Hussain, Lucknow V. ITO, Lucknow

MA 6/LKW/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5390 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 25-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 25-03-2011
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 01-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANADI VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: A P SINHA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, LUCKNOW BENCH, LUCKNOW. BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI N.K.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NOS.6, 7, 8, 9 & 10(LKW)/2011 (IN I.T.A.NOS.376, 377, 378, 379 & 380(LUC.)/2010) A.YS.: 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004- 05 MR.ANWAR HUSSAIN, VS. THE ITO, IV(I), 182/42, MASHAKGANJ, LUCKNOW. LUCKNOW. PAN AAXPH3033P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI A.P. SINHA, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ANADI VERMA, SR.D.R O R D E R PER H.L.KARWA, VICE PRESIDENT THESE FIVE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS BY THE ASS ESSEE ARISE OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 15.9.2010 PASSED IN I.T.A.NOS.376, 377, 378. 379 & 380(LUC.)/2010 RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YE ARS 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED FIVE SEPARATE APPLICATIONS UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961 ( IN SHORT THE ACT). ALL THE APPLICATIONS ARE SIMILARLY WORDED AN D THEREFORE, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, WE REPRODUCE THE CONTENTS OF M.A.N O.6(LKW)/2011, WHICH ARE AS UNDER : HON'BLE SIR, I VERY RESPECTFULLY BEG TO SAY THAT I HAD FILED APP EALS FOR ALL THE FIVE YEARS BEFORE THE HON'BLE BENCH ON 1ST JUNE, 2010. T HE APPELLANT NEITHER RECEIVED THE NOTICES OF HEARINGS NOR THE OR DERS WHICH HAVE 2 BEEN PASSED EX-PARTE. THE APPELLANT RECEIVED THE OR DERS FROM THE INCOME TAX OFFICER - V (1), LUCKNOW ON 12.2.2011. T HE APPELLANT WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE IN NOT APPEARING ON THE DATES OF HEARINGS FIXED, AS SUCH YOUR HONOUR IS PRAYED TO KI NDLY RECALL THE ORDERS AND OBLIGE. AN AFFIDAVIT IS ALSO BEING FILED IN THIS REGARD. THE CHALLAN OF REQUISITE FEE OF ` `` ` 50.00 IS ALSO BEING ENCLOSED FOR EACH YEAR. THANKING YOU, YOURS FAITHFULLY, SD. ANWAR HUSSAIN, 182/42, MASHAKGANJ, LUCKNOW. ENCLS. : AS ABOVE. 2. IN SUPPORT OF THE ABOVE APPLICATION, THE ASSESS EE HAS ALSO FILED HIS AFFIDAVIT, WHICH READS AS UNDER : AFFIDAVIT BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH, LUCKNOW I, ANWAR HUSAIN SON OF SHRI INTEKHAB HUSAIN, AGED A BOUT 38 YRS. RESIDENT OF 182/42, MASHAK GANJ, LUCKNOW DO HEREBY SOLEMNLY AFFIRM AS FOLLOW:- 1. THAT THE DEPONENT HAD FILED APPEALS BEFORE THE H ON'BLE BENCH FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01 TO 2004-05 ON 1/6/2010. 2. THAT DEPONENT CONFIRM THAT NEITHER HE RECEIVED T HE NOTICES OF HEARING ON ABOVE ADDRESS NOR THE ORDERS. 3. THAT THE DEPONENT RECEIVED THE ORDER FROM ITO V(L), LUCKNOW ON 12 FEBRUARY,2011. 3 4. AS NEITHER THE NOTICES OF HEARINGS NOR THE ORDER S WERE RECEIVED BY THE DEPONENT HE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE I N ATTENDING THE HEARING. 5. THAT THE DEPONENT PRAYS THAT HIS NON APPEARANCE MAY BE CONDONED THE ORDERS BE RECALLED. LUCKNOW SD. DATED: 15-02-2011 DEPONENT VERIFICATION I, THE ABOVE NAMED DEPONENT DO HEREBY VERIFY THAT T HE CONTENTS OF PARA 1 TO 5 OF THIS AFFIDAVIT ARE TRUE TO MY PERSONAL KN OWLEDGE. SIGNED AND VERIFIED THIS 15 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY,2011 AT CIVIL COURT COMPOUND, LUCKNOW. LUCKNOW SD. DATED: 15-02-2011 DEPONENT 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD.REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH TH E PARTIES AND HAVE ALSO CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON R ECORD. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ABOVE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE FIXED FOR HEARING ON 15.9.2010. HOWEVER, ON THE SAID DATE, NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHA LF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE APPEALS WERE TREATED UNADMITTED AS PER THE PROV ISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963. IN THE INSTANT APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT NO NOTICE OF HEARI NG WAS RECEIVED BY IT. IT IS APPARENT FROM THE RECORD THAT NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DUE ON 17.8.2010. N OW, SAID NOTICE HAS BEEN RECEIVED BACK UNDELIVERED WITH THE POSTAL REMA RKS LEFT. THUS, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS NOT SERVED UP ON THE ASSESSEE. IN THE 4 INSTANT APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT T HE NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE NOTICE OF HEARING FIXED ON 15.9.2010 WAS WHOLLY DU E TO THE REASON THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING COULD NOT BE RECEIVED AT THE END OF THE ASSESSEE, EVEN THOUGH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN RE CEIVED ON THE SAME ADDRESS. IT IS ALSO STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS P REVENTED BY A REASONABLE CAUSE AND BONA FIDE REASON FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON TH E DATE OF HEARING FIXED BY THE REGISTRY OF I.T.A.T. THUS, CONSIDERING THE E NTIRE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, WE SET ASIDE TH E ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 15.9.2010 PASSED IN I.T.A.NOS.376, 377, 378, 379 AND 380(LKW)/2010 AND RESTORE THE APPEALS FOR HEARING. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE ABOVE APPEALS FOR HEARING IN DUE COURSE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS AR E ALLOWED. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25.3.20 11. SD. SD. (N.K.SAINI) (H.L.KARWA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT MARCH 25TH ,2011. COPY TO THE : 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) (4) CIT 5.DR. A.R.,ITAT, LUCKNOW. SRIVASTAVA.