Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd., Hyderabad V. ACIT, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

MA 95/HYD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9843 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-01-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 24-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D SUDHAKAR RAO
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAGHUNATHAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 95/HYD/2012 (IN ITA NO. 2229/HYD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) DR. REDDYS LABORATORIES LTD., APPLICANT HYDERABAD. (PAN AAACD 7999Q) VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RESPONDENT CIRCLE 1(2), HYDERABAD. APPLICANT BY : SHRI S. RAGHUNATHAN RESPONDENT BY : SHRI D. SUDHAKAR RAO DATE OF HEARING : 31/12/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04/01/ 2013 ORDER PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M.: THE ASSESSEE HAS MOVED THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICAT ION SEEKING RECALL OF EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 11.4.2012 PA SSED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN ITA NO.2229/HYD/2001 BY DISMIS SING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE FOR NON-PROS ECUTION. 2. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITT ED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MOVED A PETITION ON 29-03-2012 SEEKING OF CLUBBING OF THE IMPUGNED APPEAL ALONG WITH OTHER AP PEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITTED THAT THIS PETITION W AS MOVED DURING THE HEARING OF APPEALS BY BENCH A IN ITA N O.701/H/09; 832 & 836/H/09 RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 -05. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSEE WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE 2 M.A. NO. 95/HYD/2012 M/S DR. REDDYS LABORATORIES LTD. IMPUGNED APPEAL SHALL BE CLUBBED WITH OTHER APPEALS , WHICH WERE POSTED FOR HEARING ON 12-06-2012. HENCE, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT MAKE ARRANGEMENTS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE BE NCH ON 11-04-2012. ACCORDINGLY, THE LEARNED A.R SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO WILLFUL DEFAULT ON THE PART OF THE ASS ESSEE AND SOUGHT FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER. 3. WE ALSO HEARD THE LEARNED D.R, WHO FORMALLY OBJECTED TO THE PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED T HE RECORD. WE NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD REQUESTED FOR CLUBB ING OF THE IMPUGNED APPEAL WHILE HEARING THE OTHER APPEALS FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE AND FOR THAT PURPOSE, THE ASSESSEE HAD MOV ED A CONSOLIDATED PETITION. HENCE, THE COPY OF PETITION WAS OMITTED TO BE PLACED IN THE FOLDER OF THE IMPUGNED APPEAL. HENCE THE SAID REQUEST MADE BY THE ASSESSEE ESCAPED THE ATTEN TION OF THE BENCH WHILE HEARING THE SAME ON 11.4.2012. IN ANY CASE, THE DISCUSSIONS MADE ABOVE SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE W AS TAKING STEPS FOR PROSECUTING THE APPEALS AND THERE WAS NO WILLFUL DEFAULT ON ITS PART. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE OF THE VI EW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SUFFICIENT REASONS FOR NOT APPEARING O N THE DATE OF HEARING. ACCORDINGLY, IN EXERCISE OF POWERS VES TED UPON ON US UNDER RULE 24 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, W E RECALL THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO POST THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 30/01/2013. SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING W AS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF THE PARTIES, IT IS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE REGISTRY TO SEND NOTICE OF HEARING TO 3 M.A. NO. 95/HYD/2012 M/S DR. REDDYS LABORATORIES LTD. THEM. THE PARTIES MAY NOTE THAT THE PRESENT ORDER SHALL ALSO BE CONSTRUED AS PROPER NOTICE OF HEARING. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED ACCORDINGLY ON 04/01/2013. SD/- SD/- (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) (B.R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R HYDERABAD, DATED: 4 TH JANUARY, 2013 COPY TO:- 1) M/S DR. REDDYS LABORATORIES LTD., 8-2-337, ROAD NO. 3, BANJARA HILLS, HYDERABAD 500 034. 2) ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2), HYDERABAD. 3) ADDL. CIT, RANGE 1, HYDERABAD 4) THE CIT(A)-VI, HYDERABAD 5) CIT-VI, HYDERABAD 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDERABAD.