Sri.M.J.Thomas, Cochin V. DCIT, Ernakulam

MA 87/COCH/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9358 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 22-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S VIJAYAPRABHA
• Assessee Lawyers: R LOKANATHAN
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO.87/COCH/2012 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN (JM) AND SHRI B.R. BASKA RAN(AM) M.A. NO.87/COCH/2012 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A NO. 224/COCH/2011) (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08) M.J. THOMAS VS DY.CIT, CIR.2(2) MUKKADAYIL HOUSE ERNAKULAM ST. VINCENT ROAD ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-18 PAN : ABOPT1168R (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI R LOKANATHAN RESPONDENT BY : SMT. S VIJAYAPRABHA DATE OF HEARING : 30-11-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30-11-2012 O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN (JM) THE TAXPAYER HAS FILED THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATI ON ON THE GROUND THAT THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL FOR THE SAME ASSESSMEN T YEAR WAS POSTED ON 20-09-2012; THEREFORE, THE TAXPAYER COULD NOT APPEA R BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON 12-09-2012 WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED UP FOR HEA RING. 2 ITA NO.87/COCH/2012 2. SMT. VIJAYAPRABHA, THE LD.DR VEHEMENTLY ARGUED TH AT THERE WAS NO REASONABLE CAUSE ON THE PART OF THE TAXPAYER FOR NO T APPEARING BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON 12-09-2012. REFERRING TO THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 12- 09-2012, THE LD.DR POINTED OUT THAT SEVERAL DATES W ERE GIVEN AND THE TAXPAYER COULD NOT APPEAR ON ANY ONE OF THE DATES F IXED. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND ALS O PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ADMITTEDLY, THE APPE AL WAS POSTED ON 12-09- 2012 AND NO ONE APPEARED FOR THE TAXPAYER. THE CLA IM OF THE TAXPAYER NOW BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL IS THAT THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEA L WAS ALSO POSTED FOR HEARING ON 20-09-2012; THEREFORE, THERE WAS A CONFU SION AS TO WHETHER THE TAXPAYER WAS TO APPEAR BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON 12-0 9-2012 OR 20-09-2012. BECAUSE OF THIS CONFUSION THE TAXPAYER COULD NOT AP PEAR BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON 12-09-2012. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CO NSIDERED OPINION THAT WHEN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL WAS PENDING FOR THE VE RY SAME ASSESSMENT YEAR, THIS FACT COULD HAVE VERY WELL BEEN BROUGHT T O THE NOTICE OF THE BENCH BY THE DEPARTMENT WHEN THE TAXPAYERS APPEAL WAS TA KEN UP FOR HEARING. UNFORTUNATELY THIS WAS NOT BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE BENCH. FURTHERMORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE OPINION THAT T HE CONFUSION OF THE 3 ITA NO.87/COCH/2012 TAXPAYER AS DEMONSTRATED APPEARS TO BE REASONABLE. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE ON THE PART OF THE TAXPAYER FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON 12-09-2012. ACCORDINGLY IN EXERCISE OF POWERS OF THIS TRIBUNAL UNDER PROVIS O TO RULE 24 OF THE INCOME-TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963 THE ORD ER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 12-09-2012 IS HEREBY RECALLED. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE OPINION THAT RECALLING OF THE ORDER AND GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE TAXPAYER WOULD NOT PREJUDICE THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE IN ANY WAY. I N FACT, THIS WOULD PROMOTE THE CAUSE OF JUSTICE. MOREOVER, WHEN THE DE PARTMENTAL APPEAL IS PENDING ON THE VERY SAME ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(A), THE TAXPAYERS APPEAL CAN ALSO BE HEARD ALONG WITH THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. CONSIDERING THESE FACTS, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CO NSIDERED OPINION THAT THIS IS A FIT CASE FOR RECALLING OF EXPARTE ORDER DATED 12-09-2012 PASSED BY THIS TRIBUNAL. 4. NOW THE APPEAL OF THE TAXPAYER IN ITA NO.224/COC H/2011 IS RESTORED. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO POST THE APPEAL FOR FIN AL DISPOSAL ON 11-12-2012 ALONG WITH THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL. SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING WAS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT, THERE IS NO NEED FOR I SSUING ANY SEPARATE 4 ITA NO.87/COCH/2012 NOTICE OF HEARING TO EITHER PARTY. IN OTHER WORDS, COPY OF THIS ORDER SHALL BE TREATED AS NOTICE OF HEARING FOR THE HEARING DATED 11-12-2012. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY THE TAXPAYER IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON THIS 30 TH NOVEMBER, 2012. SD/- SD/- (B.R. BASKARAN) (N.R.S. GANESAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER COCHIN, DT : 30 TH NOVEMBER, 2012 PK/- COPY TO: 1. THE APPLICANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(A) 5. THE DR (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH