M/s. Verizon Communications Singapore Pte Ltd., CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

MA 75/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8570 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 25-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIKRAMADITYA JT
• Assessee Lawyers: S UMA MAHESWARI
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : CHENNAI [BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER] M.P.NOS.72 TO 75/MDS/2012 [ARISING OUT OF I .T.A NOS.2059 TO 2062/MDS/2011] ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2001-02, 2004-05, 2005-06 AN D 2006-07 M/S VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS SINGAPORE PTE. LTD C/O S.R.BATLIBOI & CO. 6 TH & 7 TH FLOOR, A BLOCK (MODULE 601, 701-72) NO.4, RAJIV GANDHI SALAI TARAMANI, CHENNAI 600 113 [PAN AADCM 6355L] VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1 CHENNAI (PETITIONER) (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : MS. S. UMA MAHESWARI, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIKRAMADITYA, JT. CIT DATE OF HEARING : 13.7.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.7.2012 O R D E R PER N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THESE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE TRIB UNAL IN I.T.A.NOS.2059 TO 2062/MDS/2011, DATED 29.05.2012, FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02, 2004-05, 2005-06 AND 2006-07. 2. IN ITS MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS, THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED AS UNDER: M.P 72 TO 75/2012 :- 2 -: 3. THE PETITIONER SUBMITS THAT THE APPEAL FOR T HE RECENT ASSESSMENT YEAR BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL (I.E. A Y 2008-09) WAS DISPOSED OFF BY THE 'D' BENCH OF THE HON'BLE TR IBUNAL AND ACCORDINGLY, THE PETITIONER WAS INADVERTENTLY UNDE R THE IMPRESSION THAT THE MATTER WOULD BE HEARD BY THE ' D' BENCH. ON 28.05.2012, 'D' BENCH WAS NOT FUNCTIONING. HOWEVER IT WAS NOTICED LATER THAT THE MATTER WAS LISTED BEFORE 'C' BENCH AND BEFORE THE COUNSEL COULD REACH, THE MATTER HAD BEEN DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. HENCE THE PETITIONER HAS PREFE RRED THE PRESENT PETITION FOR RESTORATION. 4. THE PETITIONER SUBMITS THAT AN UNINTENDED NON -APPEARANCE FOR ONE OCCASION SHOULD NOT BRING HARDSHIP TO THE A PPELLANT WHO HAVE BEEN REGULAR IN ALL LEGAL COMPLIANCES. THE PET ITIONER SUBMITS THAT THE APPELLANTS HAVE OTHERWISE A GOOD CASE IN THEIR FAVOUR AND IF THE EXPARTE ORDER IS NOT SET ASIDE AN D RESTORED TO FILE, THEY WOULD BE PUT TO VERY SERIOUS AND UNBEARA BLE HARDSHIP. IT WOULD THEREFORE BE IMPERATIVE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE TO GRANT THE PRAYER TO RESTORE THE ABOVE MATTER ON FILE AND HEAR AND DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 5. THE PETITIONER SUBMITS THAT THEIR NON-APPEARANC E WAS DUE TO THEIR INADVERTENCE AND WAS NEITHER WILFUL NOR WANTO N AND DEEPLY REGRET FOR THE INCONVENIENCE CAUSED TO THIS HONBLE TRIBUNAL. 6. THE PETITIONER SUBMITS THAT THE CASE MAY BE R ESTORED TO ITS ORIGINAL POSITION AND MAY BE DECIDED ON MERITS. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS A BONA-FIDE REAS ON FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE OF HEARIN G FIXED ON 28.05.2012 AND THEREFORE, THE EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL DISMISSING THE APPEALS SHOULD BE RECALLED AND THE A PPEALS BE DISPOSED OF ON MERITS AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE DR DID NOT HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO RECALLING TH E ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 29.05.2012 AND HEARING THE APPEA LS OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS. M.P 72 TO 75/2012 :- 3 -: 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSIN G THE MATERIALS ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE ABOVE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUT ION BY THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PUT IN APPEARAN CE ON THE DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEALS. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE AS SESSEE HAD REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBU NAL ON THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED ON 28.05.2012. IN THE INTEREST OF JU STICE, WE RECALL OUR CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 29.05.2012 AND FIX THE HEA RING OF THE APPEALS ON 21.08.2012 . BOTH THE PARTIES WERE INFORMED IN THE COURT. H ENCE, NOTICE OF HEARING IS DISPENSED WITH. 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE FOUR MISCELLANEOUS PETITION S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON FRIDAY, THE 13 TH OF JULY,2012, AT CHENNAI SD/- SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) JUDICIAL MEMBER (N.S.SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 13 TH JULY, 2012 RD COPY TO: PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR