M/s Goodman Investors Relation Service Pvt Lat, Indore V. The ACIT 5 (1), Indore

MA 9/IND/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3567 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-05-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 07-05-2010
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 19-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V K KARAN
• 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 V.K. GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NO. 09/IND/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 276/IND/08) A.Y. 2003-04 M/S GOODMAN INVESTOR RELATION SERVICE PRIVATE LIMITED, INDORE PAN AAACG-5979-K APPLICANT VS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 5(1) INDORE RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY : WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS RESPONDENT BY : SHRI V.K. KARAN O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH, JM THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS MOVED BY THE ASSESSE E SEEKING RECALLING OF AN EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATE D 28.1.2010 ON THE GROUND THAT NO NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SERVED UPON TH E ASSESSEE. IDENTICAL PLEA WAS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS WR ITTEN SUBMISSIONS AVAILABLE ON RECORD OF THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION F OLDER. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI V.K. KARAN, LEARNED SENIOR DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE 2 CONTENDED THAT IT WAS THE DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO R EMAIN VIGILANT AND ALSO TO BE PRESENT BEFORE THE COURT ON THE APPOINTE D DATE, THEREFORE, MERE FILING OF APPEAL IS NOT ENOUGH RATHER IT IS TH E DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO REMAIN PRESENT AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE THE TR IBUNAL ON THE DATE FIXED. IT WAS ALSO PLEADED THAT WHEN THE REGISTER ED NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE, IT WAS HIS DUTY TO MAKE SURE THAT SOM EBODY SHOULD BE AVAILABLE AT THE GIVEN ADDRESS TO RECEIVE THE SAME. 2. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF TH E ASSESSEE AND THE CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED SENIOR DEPARTMENT AL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ADMITTEDLY, REGISTERED NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ASSES SEE ON THE ADDRESS AS PROVIDED IN FORM NO. 36 WHICH WAS RETURNED BACK UNDELIVERED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES. IN PRINCIPLE, WE ARE IN AGREEME NT WITH THE PLAUSIBLE REASONING ASSERTED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR DEPARTMENT AL REPRESENTATIVE BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 28.10.2010 WAS DELIVERED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES ON THE SAME ADD RESS, THEREFORE, THE ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE SAID TO BE NON-EX ISTENT, CONSEQUENTLY THERE MAY BE A POSSIBILITY THAT AT THE TIME OF VISIT OF THE POSTMAN FROM THE POSTAL DEPARTMENT, THE ADDRESSEE M AY NOT BE AVAILABLE. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS AND KEEPING IN VI EW THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, JUDICIAL PROPRIETY DEMANDS THAT NO PERSONAL SHOULD BE 3 CONDEMNED UNHEARD, THEREFORE, AN EX-PARTY ORDER DAT ED 28.1.2010 IS RECALLED. 3. REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE MAIN APPEAL OF T HE ASSESSEE FOR HEARING ON 4 TH AUGUST, 2010 FOR WHICH REGISTERED NOTICE BE SENT T O THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO BE PRESENT ON THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING AND FURTHER DIRECTED NOT TO SEEK ADJOURNMEN T WITHOUT COGENT REASON, IF ANY. FINALLY, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE IN OPEN COURT ON 10 TH MAY, 2010. SD SD (V.K. GUPTA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MAY 10 , 2010 COPY TO: APPELLANT, RESPONDENT, CIT, CIT(A), DR, G UARD FILE *DN/