Perumal Guruswamy, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

MA 92/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4774 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 05-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 18-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHIVA SRINIVASJCIT
• Assessee Lawyers: N V BALAJI
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI ... , ! ' , # $% BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.P.NO.92/MDS/2016 [IN I.T.A.NO.1066/MDS/2015] ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 2011 SHRI PERUMAL GURUSWAMY, M/S.AIM TRANSPORT, OLD NO.242, NEW NO.200, LINGHI CHETTY STREET, 1 ST FLOOR, CHENNAI 600 001. (PAN : AACPH 1372L) V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 11, CHENNAI. ( PETITIONER ) ( /RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI N.V.BALAJI, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHIVA SRINIVAS, JCIT & '(# / DATE OF HEARING : 05.08.2016 )*+ '(# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.08.2016 / O R D E R PER N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE ASSESSEE FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETIT ION UNDER PROVISO TO RULE 24 OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES P RAYING FOR RECALL OF TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 15.07.2015. 2 MP NO. 92/MDS/2016 2. SHRI N.V.BALAJI, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS CARRYING ON BUSINESS AT OLD NO.193/ NE W NO.258, LINGHI CHETTY STREET, MANNADY, CHENNAI 600 001. SUBSEQUENTLY, T HE BUSINESS OPERATION WAS CHANGED TO OLD NO.242, NEW NO.200, LINGHI CHETT Y STREET, 1 ST FLOOR, CHENNAI 600 001. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE INADVERTEN TLY OMITTED TO INFORM ABOUT THE CHANGE OF ADDRESS TO THE REGISTRY OF THIS TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, THE NOTICE SENT BY THIS TRIBUNAL WAS RETURNED WITH AN E NDORSEMENT LEFT. 3. ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E, THE FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE TO INFORM THE REGISTRY ABOUT THE CHANGE OF ADDRESS IS ONLY BECAUSE OF HIS INADVERTENCE AND NOT DUE TO NEGLIGENCE. THER EFORE, AN OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO ARGUE THE CASE ON MERIT . 4. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI SHIVA SRINIVAS, THE DEPART MENT REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO REASONABLE CAUSE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT INFORMING THE CHANGE OF ADDRESS. THEREFORE, THE RE IS NO NEED FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITH ER SIDE AND ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE SHIFTED HIS PLACE OF BUSINESS. THEREFORE, NOTICE IS SUED BY THE REGISTRY WAS RETURNED WITH AN ENDORSEMENT LEFT. NOW, THE LEARN ED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT DUE TO INADVERTENCE, THE AS SESSEE COULD NOT INFORM 3 MP NO. 92/MDS/2016 THE CHANGE OF ADDRESS TO THE REGISTRY. THEREFORE, T HIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE INADVERTENT ERROR COMMI TTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN NOT INFORMING THE CHANGE OF ADDRESS, CANNOT BE A RE ASON TO PENALISE. GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE BY RECALLING T HE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL MAY NOT PREJUDICE THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE IN AN Y WAY. THE VERY OBJECT OF THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT IS TO ASSE SS THE TAXABLE INCOME AND LEVY TAX THEREON. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSI DERED OPINION THAT THE OMISSION TO INFORM THE CHANGE OF ADDRESS BY THE ASS ESSEE IS ONLY AN INADVERTENCE. THEREFORE, THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON 15.07.2015 WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING. MOREOVER, GIVING O NE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE, TO ARGUE THE APPEAL ON MERIT, WOULD DEFIN ITELY PROMOTE THE CAUSE OF JUSTICE. THEREFORE, IN EXERCISE OF POWERS CONFERRED ON THIS TRIBUNAL UNDER PROVISO TO RULE 24 OF THE INCOME-TAX (APPELLATE TRI BUNAL) RULES, 1963, THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 15.07.2015 IS HEREBY R ECALLED. 6. NOW THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS RESTORED O N THE FILE OF THIS TRIBUNAL. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO POST THE APPE AL FOR FINAL DISPOSAL ON 28.09.2016. SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING IS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH PARTIES, NOTICE OF HEARING NEED NO T BE ISSUED TO EITHER PARTY FOR HEARING ON 28.09.2016. IN OTHER WORDS, COPY OF THIS ORDER SHALL BE TREATED AS NOTICE FOR HEARING. 4 MP NO. 92/MDS/2016 7. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS, THE MISCELLANEOUS P ETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 05 TH AUGUST, 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! ' ) ( ... ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) (N.R.S. GANESAN) # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, / /DATED, THE 05 TH AUGUST, 2016. SP. ' 0(12 32+( /COPY TO: 1. PETITIONER 2. 0456 /RESPONDENT 3. & 7( () /CIT(A) 4. & 7( /CIT 5. 28 0( /DR 6. 9: ; /GF.