M.Suresh Kumar, CHENNAI V. ITO Non Corporate Ward 14(3), CHENNAI

MA 99/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9553 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 24-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 29-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R ANITA
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRINIRANJANI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI , . , BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO. 99/CHNY/2019 [IN I.T.A. NO. 1990/CHNY/2018] ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 SHRI M. SURESHKUMAR, DOOR NO. 68-2, VALLALAR STREET (KARIKALAN STREET) , ADAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI 600 088. [PAN:DSHPS8007K] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 14(3), CHENNAI. (PETITIONER) (R ESPONDENT ) PETITIONER BY : MS. S. SRINIRANJANI, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : MS. R. ANITA, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 13.09.2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24.09.2019 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: BY MEANS OF PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, THE ASSESSEE SEEKS TO RECALL THE EXPARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN I.T.A. NO.1990/CHNY/2018 DATED 31.10.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. IN SUPPORT OF AN AFFIDAVIT FILED ALONG WITH THE PETITION, THE PETITIONER MADE A SUBMISSION THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEES DOMESTIC HELPER WHEN THE ASSESSEE WAS ON A SHORT TRIP TO HIS HOME TOWN AND RETURNED BACK ONLY AFTER THE DATE OF HEARING. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT NON-APPEARANCE AT THE TIME OF HEARING WAS NEITHER WILFUL NOR WANTON, BUT ONLY FOR THE GENUINE REASONS M.P. NO. 99/CHNY/19 2 AND PRAYED FOR RECALLING THE EX-PARTE ORDER TO READJUDICATE THE APPEAL BY GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 2. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WAS DECIDED ON MERITS AND OBJECTED TO THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES AND PERUSED THE PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. BY CONSIDERING THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, WE FIND THAT THE PETITIONER WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE OF HIS AR ON THE DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. WHILE ACCEPTING THE PETITION, WE RECALL OUR EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 31.10.2018 AND POST THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 20.11.2019. SINCE THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS ENDORSED HAVING NOTED THE DATE OF HEARING IN THE ORDER SHEET, NO SEPARATE NOTICE WOULD BE ISSUED TO BOTH PARTIES. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE M.P. FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 24 TH SEPTEMBER, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (DUVVURU RL REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 24.09.2019 VM/- M.P. NO. 99/CHNY/19 3 /COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT, 2. / RESPONDENT, 3. ( ) /CIT(A), 4. /CIT, 5. /DR & 6. /GF.