M.P. Singh, V. ACIT, Range-I,

MA 73/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6920 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 1998-1999
• Appeal Filed On: 27-04-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRATIMA KAUSHIK
• Assessee Lawyers: NONEWRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH H DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JM & SHRI K. D. RA NJAN, AM MISC. APP. NO. 73 (DEL) OF 2011. [ IN I. T. APPEAL NO. 1216 (DEL) OF 2006 ]. ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1998-99. SHRI M. P. SINGH, ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, H. NO. 1337, SECTOR : 15, VS. R A N G E : 1, F A R I D A B A D. F A R I D A B A D. PAN/GIR NO. ARGPS 4836D. ( APPLICANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : N O N E [ WRITTEN SUBMISS IONS ]; DEPARTMENT BY : MS. PRATIMA KAUSHIK, SR. D. R. ; O R D E R. PER K. D. RANJAN, AM : THIS MISC. APPLICATION BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FI LED AGAINST THE TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 16TH FEBRUARY, 2009 PASSED IN I. T. APPEAL NO. 1216 (DEL) OF 2006 PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN HIS MISC. APPLICATION ALONG WITH SWORN AFFIDAVIT HAS SUBMITTED THAT HE IS PERMANENT RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 1337, SECTOR: 15, F ARIDABAD FOR THE LAST 25 YEARS AND HAS NEVER CHANGED HIS RESIDENCE. HE HAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IN THE PAST HE HAS RECEIVED ALL THE NOTICES AT THE SAME ADDRESS. HE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT EV EN OTHERWISE, THE RULE 24 ITSELF SAYS THAT THE TRIBUNAL, EVEN WHILE DISPOSING THE APPEAL EX-PARTE FOR FAILURE OF THE APPEARANCE OF THE APPELLANT, SHOULD DISPOSE OF THE SAME ON MERITS, WHICH MEANS T HAT THE APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR 2 MISC. APP. NO. 73 (DEL) OF 2011. DEFAULT. IT HAS BEEN PLEADED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER O F THE TRIBUNAL. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHAL F OF THE ASSESSEE. HE HAS FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. SR. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAD EXPLAINED THE REASONS FOR NON-APPEARANCE THAT NOTICE WAS NOT RECEIVED BY HIM. WE ARE, THEREFORE, SATISFIED THAT THE ASSE SSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE. WE, THEREFORE, RECALL THE ORDER DATED 16TH FEBRUARY , 2009 FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. THE APPEAL WILL BE FIXED FOR HEARING ON 17 TH OCTOBER, 2011 . THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO ISSUE NOTICE ACCORDINGLY. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY ASSESSEE, IS ALLOWED. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON : 05 TH AUGUST, 2011. SD/- SD/- [ RAJPAL YADAV ] [ K. D. RANJAN ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 05 TH AUGUST, 2011 . *MEHTA * COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : - 1. APPLICANT. 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CIT, 4. CIT (APPEALS), 5. SR. DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT. 3 MISC. APP. NO. 73 (DEL) OF 2011.