S.Muralidharan, Chengalpattu V. ITO International Taxation 1(2), CHENNAI

MA 65/CHNY/2019

AI Insights

The case revolves around a Miscellaneous Petition filed by Shri S. Muralidharan, the petitioner, seeking to recall an earlier Tribunal order due to non-receipt of hearing notices. The petitioner argued that the address was incorrectly entered in Form 36, leading to the Tribunal's notice not reaching him, which was an inadvertent error. The Tribunal, acknowledging the mistake and the absence of serious objections from the respondent, decided to recall the previous order and provide the petitioner another opportunity to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 135265 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 07-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 07-09-2023
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 19-03-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी वी दुगाŊ राव Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी जी. मंजुनाथा, लेखा सद˟ के समƗ Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member M.P. No. 65/Chny/2019 [In I.T.A. No.1280/Chny/2018] Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shri S. Muralidharan, No. 1873, I Block, 26 th Street, Thiruvalluvar Kudiyiruppu, Chengalpattu 603 002, Tamil Nadu. [PAN:CMEPM3798R] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation 1(2), Chennai. (Petitioner) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) Petitioner by : Shri Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 08.09.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 08.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: By means of present Miscellaneous Petition, the assessee seeks to recall the order passed by the Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 1280/Chny/2018 dated 12.10.2018 for the assessment year 2008-09. 2. By referring to the petition, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee had wrongly entered the address in Form 36 due to inadvertence and thereby, the hearing notice issued by the Tribunal has not reached the assessee. It was further submission that M.P. No.65/Chny/19 2 legal issues are involved in the appeal non-appearance on behalf of the assessee when the appeal was taken up for hearing is neither wilful nor wanton and prayed that the assessee may be given an opportunity of being heard to substantiate his case before the Tribunal. 3. On the other hand, the ld. DR has not made any serious objection. 4. We have heard both the sides, perused the order passed by the Tribunal dated 12.10.2018. Since the assessee had given wrong address inadvertently, the assessee has not received the hearing notice issued by the Tribunal and could not put its appearance when the appeal was taken up for hearing. We are of the opinion that the assessee shall be given an opportunity to substantiate his case before the Tribunal. Accordingly, we recall the order of the Tribunal passed in I.T.A. No. 1280/Chny/2018 dated 12.10.2018 and direct the Registry to post the appeal for hearing on regular course by issuing notices to both the parties. 5. In the result, the MP filed by the petitioner is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 08 th September, 2023 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (MANJUNATHA, G.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 08.09.2023 M.P. No.65/Chny/19 3 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF.