Shri Amritlal Jain, Indore V. The CIT-I, Indore

MA 82/IND/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9004 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 03-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 07-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: SAKSHI VERMA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NOS. 82 & 83/IND/2012 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS351/IND/2007 & ITA NO.845/IN D/2005) A.YS. 1999-00 & 2000-01 AMRIT LAL JAIN, INDORE PAN ACWPJ 2910 Q :: APPLICANT VS CIT-1, INDORE AND ITO-2(2), INDORE :: RESPONDENTS APPLICANT BY SHRI ASHISH GOYAL & MISS SAKSHI VERMA RESPONDENT S BY SHRI R.A. VERMA DATE OF HEARING 3.8.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 3.8.2012 O R D E R PER R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BOTH THESE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS U/S 254(2) O F THE ACT ARE PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT TH E TRIBUNAL VIDE 2 ORDER DATED 15.3.2010 DISMISSED THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION AS ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR ON THE APPOINTED DATE AS THE NOTICE SENT TO ASSESSEE WAS RETURNED UN SERVED. 2. DURING HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE , SHRI ASHISH GOYA AND MISS SAKSHI VERMA ADVANCED THEIR ARGUMENTS WHICH ARE IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS MENTIONED IN THE APPLICATION S BY FURTHER SUBMITTING THAT THE NON-APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT INTENTIONAL RATHER WAS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF TH E ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, IT WAS REQUESTED THAT THE EXPARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL MAY BE RECALLED. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. SR. DR CONTENDED THAT IT WAS THE DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO REMAIN PRESENT ON T HE APPOINTED DATE. 3. WE HAVE PERUSED THE RECORD AND CONSIDERED THE AR GUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LEARNED RESPECTIVE COUNSEL. UNDER T HE FACTS NARRATED HEREINABOVE AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRINCI PLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT SUBS TANTIAL CAUSE OF JUSTICE MUST PREVAIL ON TECHNICALITIES ESPECIALLY W HEN THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THE REASONS OF NON-APPEARANCE AS MENTION ED IN THE APPLICATION, THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NO PERSON SHOULD BE 3 CONDEMNED UNHEARD, CONSEQUENTLY, THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 15.3.2010 IS RECALLED. BOTH THE APP EALS OF THE ASSESSEE WILL BE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 31 ST AUGUST, 2012. SINCE THIS DATE WAS DULY PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AND NOTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, NO SEPARATE NOTICE OF HEARING WILL BE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRY. FINALLY, BOTH THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS OF TH E ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN T HE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCL USION OF THE HEARING ON 3.8.2012. SD SD (JOGINDER SINGH) (R.C.SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 3.8.2012 COPY TO: APPELLANT, RESPONDENT, CIT, CIT(A), DR, GU ARD FILE !VYS!