M/s Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd., Shahjahanpur V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bareilly

MA 69/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2557 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-11-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 04-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y P SRIVASTA VA
• Assessee Lawyers: SHYAM LAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NOS.69 TO 71 /LKW/20 14 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A.NOS.26 TO 28/LKW/2014) A. YRS:2006 - 07 TO 2008 - 09 M/S KISAN SAHKARI CHINI MILLS LTD. TILHAR, SHAHJAHANPUR. PAN:AAAAK0207C VS. DY.C.I.T. - I, BAREILLY. (A PPLICANT ) (RESPONDENT) M.A. NO.76 /LKW/20 14 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A.NO. 31/LKW/2014) ASSESSMENT YEAR:2005 - 06 M/S KISAN SAHKARI CHINI MILLS LTD. SEMI KHERA, BAREILLY. PAN:AAAAK3453A VS. DY.C.I.T. - I, BAREILLY. (A PPLICANT ) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY SHRI SHYAM LAL, C.A. RESPONDENT BY SHRI Y. P. SRIVASTAVA, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 19/09/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1 0 /1 1 /2014 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THESE MISC. APPLICATIONS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEES TO RECALL THE EX - PARTE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 4 TH JULY, 2014. 2. IN THESE MISC. APPLICATIONS, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT SHRI SHYAM LAL, FCA AND A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR ON THE DATE OF HEARING ON 23/06/2014 DUE TO CARDIOLOGICAL PROBLEM BECAUSE HE HAD TO UNDERGO THE PROCEDURE OF ANGIOGRAPHY. HE SUBMITTED THAT THEREFORE , THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR [ 2 ] NON APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND HENCE , THE EX - PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL MAY BE RECALLED. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SAME CONTENTIONS. AT THIS JUNCTURE , IT WAS POINTED OUT BY THE BENCH THAT EVEN AS PER THIS EX - PARTE ORDER, IT IS HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT SINCE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) WAS CRYPTIC AND IT IS NOT A REASONED AND SPEAKING ORDER, THE MATTER WAS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT(A) FOR A FRESH DECISION BY WAY OF PASSING A REASONED AND SPEAKING ORDER. THE BENCH POINTED OUT THAT UNDER THESE FACT S, EVEN IF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS RECALLED, THE DECISION WILL BE THE SAME BECAUSE THIS FACT WILL NOT CHANGE THAT THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS NOT A SPEAKING AND REASONED ORDER AND THEREFORE, NO PURPOSE WILL BE SERVED BY RECALLING THE TRIBUNAL ORDER AND HEA RING LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE AND REPEATING THE SAME ORDER. IN THIS VIEW OF THE FACTS, WE HOLD THAT IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, RECALLING OF THE EX - PARTE TRIBUNAL ORDER WILL NOT SERVE ANY PURPOSE AND HENCE, THIS REQUEST IS REJECTED. 4. IN THE RE SULT, ALL THE MISC. APPLICATIONS OF THE ASSESSEE STAND DISMISSED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER AC COUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 1 0 /1 1 /2014. *C.L.SINGH COPY OF THE O RDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A ) 5. DR, ITAT, LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR