Shiv Kumar & Sons (HUF), Rajpura V. ITO, Rajpura

MA 87/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5530 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 21-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 05-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: GAURAV MITTAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NO.87/CHD/2016 IN ITA NO.288/CHD/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) SHIV KUMAR & SONS (HUF), VS. THE ITO, RAJPURA (PUNJAB). WARD, RAJPURA. PAN: AAJHS5329F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI GAURAV MITTAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH, DR DATE OF HEARING : 21.04.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.04.2017 O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M . : THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE APPLICANT FOR RECALLING OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNA L DATED 05.04.2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, WHICH WAS DECIDED AND DISMISSED EX-PARTE. 2. THE REASON FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING GIVEN IN THE APPLICATION IS THAT NOTICE OF THE LAST DATE OF HEARING ON 05.04.2016 WAS NOT SERVED O N THE ASSESSEE. AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE KARTA OF THE ASSESSE E HUF SH.SHIV KUMAR JALAN TO THIS EFFECT WAS ALSO FILED ALONGWITH THE APPLICATION. 3. THE LD. DR DID NOT CONTROVERT THE SAME. 2 4. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ENTIRE FACTS OF THE CASE FOR OUR CONSIDERATION. WE ARE CONVINCED THA T THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT REASON FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE APPOINTED DAT E OF HEARING TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL. WE ARE THEREFORE O F THE OPINION THAT TO MEET THE ENDS OF NATURAL JUSTICE, T HE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY O F BEING HEARD. EXERCISING THE POWER OF THE TRIBUNAL P ROVIDED IN THE PROVISO TO RULES 24 AND 25 OF THE ITAT RULES 1963, TO SET ASIDE AN EX-PARTE ORDER AND RESTORE THE APPE AL IN CASE WHERE AN ASSESSEE DEMONSTRATES REASONABLE CAUS E FOR NON-APPEARANCE, AND CONSIDERING THE ENTIRETY OF FAC TS IN THE PRESENT CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS IS A FIT CASE FOR RECALLING THE ORDER FOR FRESH HEARING, WHICH WE HEREBY DO. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE CASE FOR F RESH HEARING IN DUE COURSE AND ISSUE FORMAL NOTICE OF TH E SAME TO BOTH THE PARTIES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FI LED BY THE APPLICANT IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (SANJAY GARG) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 26 TH APRIL, 2017 *RATI* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 3