Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board, Panchkula V. DCIT, Panchkula

MA 76/CHANDI/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1356 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 27-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 18-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: HARISH NAYYAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R. SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER MISC. APPLICATION NO. 76/CHD/2013 IN ITA NO. 230/CHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 HARYANA STATE AGRICULTURAL VS. D.C.I.T. PANCHKULA MARKETING BOARD CIRCLE, PANCHKULA PANCHKULA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI HAR ISH NAYYAR RESPONDENT BY SHRI AKHILESH GUPTA DATE OF HEARING 24.1.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 27.1.2014 O R D E R PER T.R.SOOD, A.M THROUGH THIS MISC. APPLICATION THE ASSESSEE HAS SO UGHT RECALLING OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 2 30/CHD/2012 THROUGH WHICH THE ASSESSEES APPEAL HAS BEEN DISMIS SED IN LIMINE. 2 THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE REFERRED TO THE M ISC. APPLICATION AND POINTED OUT THAT ON EARLIER HEARING S VARIOUS DOCUMENTS HAVE A ALREADY BEEN FILED INCLUDING THE W RITTEN SUBMISSIONS. THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED ON VARIOUS DAT ES AND IN BETWEEN THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION. THE LAST NOTIC E WAS GIVEN FOR HEARING 5.6.2013. DURING THAT PERIOD VARIOUS O FFICIALS WERE BUSY IN THE PROCUREMENT AND STORAGE OF WHEAT AND TH E ACCOUNTS OFFICER WAS ON TOUR AND THE NOTICE COULD NOT BE HAN DED OVER TO THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. HE FURTHER SUBMI TTED THAT 2 SINCE THE TRIBUNAL HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN LIMI NI WITHOUT AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE THE ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 3 ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. D.R. FOR THE REVENUE O PPOSED THE SUBMISSIONS. 4 AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS R EASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. FURTH ER SINCE THE ASSESSEES APPEAL HAS BEEN DISMISSED IN LIMINI, WE ARE OF THE OPINION, THAT THIS ORDER SHOULD BE RECALLED. ACCORD INGLY WE RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 230/CHD /2012. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE HEARING OF THE APPE AL ON 12.3.2014 AND THE ASSESSEE SHOULD TAKE NOTICE FROM THIS ORDE R ITSELF AS NO SEPARATE NOTICE WOULD BE ISSUED. 5 IN THE RESULT, MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27.1.2014 (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (T.R. SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 27.1.2014 SURESH COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT/THE C IT(A)/THE DR 3