Shri Gurmukhdas Saluja, Bhopal V. The ACIT, 1(1), Bhopal

MA 85/IND/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9003 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 03-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 11-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A 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. NO. 85/IND/2012 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 329/IND/2005) A.Y.2000-01 GURMUKHDAS SALUJA, BHOPAL PAN AAFPS 2777 N :: APPLICANT VS ACIT-1(1), BHOPAL :: RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI SUMIT NEMA RESPONDENT BY SHRI R.A. VERMA DATE OF HEARING 3 . 8 .2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 3 . 8 .2012 O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION U/S 254(2) OF THE A CT IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE TR IBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 26.8.2008 DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE A SSESSEE FOR NON- 2 PROSECUTION AS ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR ON THE APP OINTED DATE AS THE NOTICE SENT TO ASSESSEE WAS RETURNED UNSERVED. 2. DURING HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE , SHRI SUMIT NEMA, ASSERTED AS MENTIONED IN THE MA BY FURTHER SU BMITTING THAT THE NON-APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ON LY DUE TO THE REASON STATED IN THE PETITION AND NOT INTENTIONAL, THEREFORE, IT WAS REQUESTED THAT THE EXPARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DA TED 26.8.2008 MAY BE RECALLED. HOWEVER, THE LD. SR. DR CONTENDED THAT IT WAS THE DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO REMAIN PRESENT ON THE APPOI NTED 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 CONDEMNED UNHEARD, CONSEQUENTLY, THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 26.8.2008 IS RECALLED. THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE WILL BE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 18 TH SEPTEMBER, 2012. SINCE THIS 3 DATE WAS DULY PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AND NOTE D BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, NO SEPARATE NOTICE OF HEA RING WILL BE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRY. FINALLY, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSE SSEE IS 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 (R.C.SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER DATED: 3.8.2012 COPY TO: APPELLANT, RESPONDENT, CIT, CIT(A), DR, GU ARD FILE !VYS! 4