A.Radhakrishnan, Pollachi V. ITO, Pollachi

MA 62/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3165 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 31-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 19-05-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S DASGUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: S VISWANATHAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P.NO.62/MDS./2015 ( ./ I.T.A.NOS.1816/MDS./2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2008-2009) SHRI A.RADHAKRISHNAN, 7/51,S.KUMARAPALAYM, MAPPILLAIGOUNDANPUDUR, POLALCHI 642 005. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I(2), POLLACHI. PAN AJQPR 7599 Q ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : MR.S.VISWANATHAN,ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : MR.S.DAS GUPTA, JCIT, D.R / DATE OF HEARING : 31.07.2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.07.2015 / O R D E R PER A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS I0073 FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE PRAYING FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.1 816/MDS./2013 DATED 3 RD MARCH, 2015 PASSED EX PARTE FOR NON-APPEARANCE. MP NO.62 /MDS/15 2 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE THE FOLLOWING WRITTEN SUBM ISSIONS BEFORE US:- APPLICATION FOR RESTORATION OF APPEAL 1. A.RADHAKRISHNAN, THE APPLICANT/APPELLANT HEREIN PREFERRED HAD AN APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE ITAT, CHENNAI AGAINST THE IMPUGN ED ORDER IN PAN NO. AJQPR7599Q FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 WHICH WA S NUMBERED AS ITA NO.1816/2013. 2. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED UP BEFORE THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL ON 03.03.2015 THE APPELLANT WAS NOT REPRESENTED AND CONSEQUENTLY THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL DISMISSED THE APPEAL EXPARTE FOR NON-PROSECUTION VIDE FINAL ORDER ITA NO.1816/CHNY/2013 DATED 03.03.2015, A COPY OF WHICH WAS RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT ON XXXX. 3. IT IS MOST HUMBLY SUBMITTED THAT THE APPELLANT H EREIN IS AN UNEDUCATED AGRICULTURALIST LOCATED IN A SMALL VILLAGE NEAR POL LACHI. EVEN THE DISPUTE UNDER CONSIDERATION IS ONLY VIS-A-VIS CERTAIN AGRICULTURA L INCOME FOR WHICH THE DEMAND WAS MADE. THE APPELLANT MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITS T HAT HE HAS ENGAGED THE COUNSEL TO REPRESENT HIM DURING THE HEARINGS BEFORE THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL AND HE IS NOT IN RECEIPT OF ANY HEARING INTIMATION AT ALL FOR THE SAID HEARING ON 03.03.2015. 4. THE APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT WHEN HE CONTA CTED THE COUNSELS OFFICE ON RECEIPT OF THE FINAL ORDER, HE WAS INFORMED THAT NO CASE WAS LISTED ON THE SAID DATE IN THE NAME OF THE COUNSEL AS CONFIRMED BY THE OFFICE STAFF. UPON RECEIPT OF INFORMATION THAT THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED BY THE HO NBLE TRIBUNAL, WHEN THE CAUSE LIST OF THE MATTERS ON THE SAID DATE WAS VERI FIED, IT WAS TRACED THAT THE MP NO.62 /MDS/15 3 MATTER WAS LISTED IN THE NAME OF SOME OTHER COUNSEL , VIZ. MR.JAGADEESAN, WHEREAS THE ADVOCATE ON RECORD IS MR.S.VISWANATHAN . A COPY OF THE CAUSE LIST OF THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL DATED 03.03.2015 AS VE RIFIED ON 07.03.2015 IS ATTACHED FOR READY REFERENCE AND CONSIDERATION OF T HE HONBLE TRIBUNAL. THE COUNSEL HAS ADMITTED THAT IT IS A MISTAKE ON THEIR PART, APPARENTLY THE LISTING IN THE CAUSELIST HAS MADE THE STAFF IN THE OFFICE OF T HE COUNSEL, NOT TAKING PROPER COGNIZANCE OF THE MATTER. 5. THE APPLICANT HUMBLY SUBMITS THAT THE OMISSION T O APPEAR ON THE DATE OF HEARING OR PROPERLY REPRESENTED THROUGH THE COUNSEL IS NEITHER INTENTIONAL NOR WANTON AND IS ENTIRELY OUT OF IGNORANCE OF THE HEAR ING DATE PRAYS THAT THE INADVERTENCE MAY KINDLY BE CONDONED. THE HONBLE TR IBUNAL IS EMPOWERED TO CONDONE THE OMISSION AND RESTORE THE APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. 6. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE, IT IS MOST RESPECTFUL LY PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL DATED 03.03.2015 DISMISSING THE MA IN APPEAL FOR NON- COMPLIANCE BE RECONSIDERED AND THE APPEAL RESTORED TO ITS ORIGINAL NUMBER BEFORE THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL. THE APPELLANT CRAVES T HE INDULGENCE OF THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL THAT THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WILL BE SERVE D IF THE SAID ORDER IS MODIFIED AND THE APPEAL BE RESTORED AS THE CONDITIONS OF PRE-DEP OSIT HAVE BEEN FULFILLED TO THE LETTER. 7. THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT THE APPELLANT HAS A G OOD CASE ON MERITS AND THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE WILL BE JEOPARDIZED IF THE APP EAL IS THUS DISMISSED. 8. THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL HAVE IN SIMILAR SET OF FACTS HAVE CONSIDERED THE PLEA FOR RESTORATION OF APPEAL AND HEARD THE APPEAL. PRAYER MP NO.62 /MDS/15 4 IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING SUBMISSIONS IT IS HUMBLY P RAYED THAT THIS HONBLE TRIBUNAL MAY BE PLEASED TO RECALL THE ORDER 03.03.2 015 AND RESTORE THE APPEAL NO. ITA NO.1816/CHNY/2013 OR PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER AS THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL MAY DEEM FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND THUS RENDER JUSTICE. DATED AT CHENNAI THIS 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2015 SD/- APPLICANT / APPELLANT 3. BEFORE US THE LD.AR REQUESTED THAT FOR THE AFOR ESAID REASONS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GRANTED TO PRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE BENCH AND THEREFORE THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL MAY BE RECALLED. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. D.R FIRMLY OBJECTED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD.AR. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSING THE WR ITTEN SUBMISSIONS & AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE A RE OF THE OPINION THAT AS REQUESTED BY THE LD.AR ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT HIS CASES BEFOR E THE TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE HEREBY REC ALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 03.03.2015 AND POST THE CASE FOR FRE SH HEARING ON 03.11.2015. SINCE BOTH THE PARTIES ARE INTIMATED I N THE OPEN COURT, NOTICE NEED NOT BE SERVED. MP NO.62 /MDS/15 5 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSI ON OF HEARING ON THE 3 1ST JULY, 2015. SD/- SD/- (V. DURGA RAO) (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 3 1ST JULY, 2015. K S SUNDARAM. COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/CIT (A)/CIT/D.R./GUARD FILE