Vivek Prakash, V. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

MA 74/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7190 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 31-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R S NEGI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL DELHI BENCH F DELHI M.A. NO. 74(DEL)/2011 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 821(DEL)/2009) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 SHRI VIVEK PRAKASH, INCOME-TAX OFFICER, 6314, F-6, ALOK VIHAR-2, VS. WA RD 48(4), NEW DELHI. SECTOR-50, NOIDA. PAN: ACYPP2870K (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI BHARAT BERIWAL, A DVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R.S. NEGI, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 21.10.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.10.2011 ORDER PER K.G. BANSAL : AM IN THIS CASE, THE TRIBUNAL HAD PASSED THE ORDER ON 16.02.2001, IN WHICH THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. FROM THE RECORD, IT IS ALSO SEEN THAT THE CASE WAS HEARD ON 16.02.2010 WHEN NOBODY HAD ADDED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSES SEE IN SPITE OF THE FACT M.A.NO. 74(DEL)/2011 2 THAT THE COURIER SLIP SHOWING SERVICE OF THE NO TICE HAD BEEN RECEIVED. THE ASSESSEE APPLIED FOR RECALLING THE ORDER ON 31 .03.2011. IN THE APPLICATION, IT IS MENTIONED THAT AS PER KNOWLEDGE OF THE AS SESSEE THE CASE WAS LAST FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE H BENCH ON 04.01. 2010. HOWEVER, THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION AND THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE NON-APPEARANCE ON 16.02.2010 WAS ENTIREL Y UNINTENTIONAL AS THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RECEIVE THE NOTICE. THE COURI ER SLIP NEITHER BEARS THE SIGNATURE OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY OF THE FAMILY M EMBER. AN AFFIDAVIT IS ALSO FILED IN SUPPORT OF THIS AVERMENT. 2. IN THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE US, THE LD. CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE AFORESAID FACTS. ON THE OTHER HAND , THE LD. DR OPPOSED THE APPLICATION ON THE GROUND THAT THE NOTICE HAD B EEN SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE BY POST. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE US. WE FIND THAT THE SIGNATURE ON THE COU RIER SLIP DOES NOT MATCH THE SIGNATURE ON THE AFFIDAVIT OR THE APPLICATI ON. THEREFORE, IT IS HELD THAT THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE IS CORRECT. ACCO RDINGLY, THE ORDER IS M.A.NO. 74(DEL)/2011 3 RECALLED WITH A VIEW TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERI TS. FOR THIS PURPOSE, THE APPEAL IS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 10.01.2012. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPLICATION IS ALLOWED. SD/- SD/- (A.D. JAIN) (K.G.BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SP SATIA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- SHRI VIVEK PRAKASH, NOIDA. ITO, WARD 48(2), NEW DELHI. CIT(A) CIT THE DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR.