M/s Vardhman Yarns & Threads Limited, Ludhiana V. ACIT, Ludhiana

MA 99/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7056 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 04-09-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S K BHASIN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCHES, B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO. 99/CHD/2017 IN ITA NO. 59/CHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 SHRI RAJBIR SINGH WALIA, VS THE DCIT, HOUSE NO. 345, SECTOR 9-A, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN : AAAPW8792P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.K. BHASIN RESPONDENT BY : SHRI HEMANT GUPTA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 27.07.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.08. 2018 ORDER PER DIVA SINGH BY THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION U/S 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961, THE ASSESSEE PRAYS FOR RECALL OF EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 22.02.2018 IN ITA NO. 59/CHD/2015 WHEREIN THE APPEAL OF T HE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED IN LIMINE ON THE GROUNDS OF NON-PROSECUTION. 2. INVITING ATTENTION TO THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED, IT WAS THE PRAYER OF THE LD. AR THAT THE ASSESSEE ON 18.01.2017 SHIFT ED ITS RESIDENCE FROM HOUSE NO. 345 SECTOR 9-D CHANDIGARH TO HOUSE NO. 3 36 SECTOR 9-D CHANDIGARH AND INADVERTENTLY THE ASSESSEE DID NOT INFORM THE ITAT ABOUT THE CHANGE OF RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. IT WAS HIS SUBMISSION TH AT ON ACCOUNT OF THIS FACT THE NOTICES WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN SENT TO TH E ASSESSEE, HAVE NOT BEEN RECEIVED. THE LD. AR STATED ON QUERY THAT CORR ECTIVE ACTION HAS NOT BEEN CARRIED OUT IN FORM NO. 36, HOWEVER, IT WAS STATED THAT IT S HALL BE PROMPTLY CARRIED OUT. ACCEPTING THE PRAYER OF THE ASSES SEE AND HIS UNDERTAKING THAT FORM NO. 36 WOULD BE FILED BY THE ASSESS EE BY GIVING THE CORRECT ADDRESS ETC., THE DEPARTMENT WAS REQUIRED TO STATE THEIR CASE. THE LD. SR.DR ON CONSIDERING THE RECORD HAD NO OBJECTION IF T HE ORDER IS RECALLED AND THE APPEAL IS DECIDED ON MERITS. MA /99/CHD/2018 IN ITA 59/CHD/2015 PAGE 2 OF 2 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. ADMITTEDLY IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, NOT ICES SENT BY THE ITAT WERE NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS NOT IN D ISPUTE THAT ONUS TO PLACE THE CORRECT ADDRESS ON RECORD WAS ON THE ASSES SEE AND THE ONLY WAY IT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE WAS BY FILING AMENDED FORM NO. 36, WE FIND THAT SUCH STEPS HAVE NOT BEEN TAKEN. CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR NON-PROSECUTION, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO EXERCISE THE POWERS VESTED IN US BY PRO VISO TO RULE 24 OF THE ITAT RULES 1963 AND RECALL THE ORDER DATED 22.02.201 8. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS ANSAL HOUSING CONSTRUCTION LTD. 274 ITR 131 (DEL). 4.1. PARTIES WERE HEARD IN REGARD TO THEIR CONVENIENCE A ND AFTER HEARING THEM, THE APPEAL WAS DIRECTED TO BE LISTED FOR HEARING ON 20.09.2018. FOR THE SAID DATE NO SEPARATE NOTICE WOULD BE SENT AS THE SAID DATE HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED IN THE PRESENCE OF THE PARTIES ITSELF. THE ASS ESSEE IS DIRECTED TO BRING ON RECORD ITS CORRECT ADDRESS. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09.08.2018. SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT,CHANDIGARH.