Tupakula Sreedhar Reddy, , Bangalore V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2), Hyderabad

MA 9/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6218 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 18-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUMAN MALIK
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 09/HYD/2018 (IN ITA NO. 374/HYD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) SRI TUPAKULA SREEDHAR REDDY, ANANTAPUR. PAN AGKPR 0950 N VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(2), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PAWAN KUMAR CHAKRAPANI REVENUE BY : SMT. SUMAN MALIK DATE OF HEARING : 02/02/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02-02-2018 O R D E R PER P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M.: THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE SEEKING RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 21/06/201 7 DISMISSING THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN-LIMINE. 2. IT IS STATED IN THE APPLICATION THAT THE DEFECT NOTICE WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAD CHANGED HI S ADDRESS AND THE SAME WAS NOT COMMUNICATED TO THE TRIBUNAL DUE TO IN ADVERTENCE. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING ALONG WITH THE DEFECT NOTICE WAS RECEIVED BY THE EMPLOYEE OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, WHO FAILED TO INFORM THE COUNSEL, DUE TO WHICH, THERE W AS NO APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING. LD. COUNSEL ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOW RECTIFIED THE DEFECTS AND HAS FILED RELEVANT DOCUME NTS ALONG WITH THIS APPLICATION. HE, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE ORDER O F THE TRIBUNAL MAY BE RECALLED AND THE APPEAL BE FIXED FOR HEARING FOR AD JUDICATION ON MERITS. 3. LD. DR WAS ALSO HEARD. 2 MA NO. 09 /HYD/2018 TUPAKULA SREEDHAR REDDY, BENGALURU 4. HAVING REGARD TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUN SEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO ON PERUSAL OF THE DOCUMENTS ANNEXED THERET O, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE OF HEARING I.E. ON 21/06/2017. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ALL THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS IN SU PPORT OF RECTIFICATION OF THE DEFECTS. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WE RECALL THE ORD ER DATED 21/06/2017 AND FIX THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 27/03/2018. REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO VERIFY THE DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR RECTIFICATION O F DEFECTS POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY. AS THE AFORESAID DATE OF HEARING OF A PPEAL WAS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN PRESENCE OF BOTH THE COUNSELS, NO SEPARATE NOTICE OF HEARING IS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED TO THE PARTIES. 5. IN THE RESULT, MA FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOW ED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 ND FEBRUARY, 2018. SD/- SD/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDIC IAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 2 ND FEBRUARY, 2018 KV COPY TO:- 1) TUPAKULA SREEDHAR REDDY, NO. 116, SUMADHURA A NANDAM APT., BOREWELL ROAD, WHITEFIELD, BENGALURE 560 06 6. 2) ITO, WARD 3(2), HYDERABAD. 3) CIT(A) 3, HYDERABAD 4) PR. CIT- 3, HYDERABAD. 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., H YDERABAD. 6) GUARD FILE