Vasanthi Bole, Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(3), Hyderabad

MA 99/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9781 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 09-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NILANJAN DEY
• Assessee Lawyers: B V KRISHNA RAO
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

MA NOS 99 AND 100 OF 2019 VASANTHI BOLE HYDERABAD. PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NOS. 99 & 100/HYD/2019 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS1968 & 1967/HYD/2018) ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2015-16 & 2014-15 SMT. VASANTHI BOLE HYDERABAD PAN: AFJPB8132N VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(3) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SRI B.V. KRISHNA RAO REVENUE BY : SRI NILANJAN DEY, DR DATE OF HEARING: 13/09/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 20/09/2019 ORDER PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. THESE M.AS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT SEEKING RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DAT ED 27.02.2019, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEES APPEALS FOR A.Y 2015-16 AND 2014-15 RESPECTIVELY WERE DISMISSED FOR NON-RECTIFICATION O F THE DEFECTS AND ALSO NON-APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE OR HER AUTHORIZ ED REPRESENTATIVE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. IT IS STATE D BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RECEIVE THE DEFECT NOTICE OR THE NOTICE OF HEARING AND THEREFORE, SOUGHT RECALL OF THE ORDER F OR HEARING ON MERITS. IN PARA 3 OF THE M.A. THE ASSESSEE HAS STAT ED AS UNDER: 3. AS THE CHILDREN OF THE APPELLANT ARE STAYING AT THEIR WORK PLACE, THE APPELLANT ALONG WITH HER SPOUSE HAS BEEN STAYING IN THE ABOVE MENTIONED ADDRESS SINCE 2005. HOWEVER, BOTH APPELLANT AND HER HUSBAND ARE GETTING OLDER, THE GROUND PORTION OF THE HOUSE WAS GIVEN ON RENT AND THEY ARE LIVING IN THE UPPER PORTION OF THE HOU SE. INITIALLY, THE POSTMAN MIGHT HAVE BEEN CONFUSED WIT H THE MA NOS 99 AND 100 OF 2019 VASANTHI BOLE HYDERABAD. PAGE 2 OF 2 NAME BOARD OF THE TENANT WHICH LEADS TO UNDELIVERY OF NOTICES OF THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE APPELLANT INFORMED THE CONCERNED POSTMAN TO DELIVER LETTERS IN THE UPPER PORTION OF THE HOUSE. 2. THE LEARNED DR WAS ALSO HEARD. 3. TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THAT SHE WAS NOT SERVED WITH THE DEFECT NO TICE OR THE NOTICE FOR HEARING AND PARTICULARLY THE CONTENTION IN PARA 3 OF THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION WHICH ARE REPRODUCED ABOVE, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY REASON ABLE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE OF H EARING. THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 27.02.20 19 IS RECALLED AND THE APPEALS ARE RE-FIXED FOR HEARING ON 10.03.2 020. THE ASSESSEE SHALL RECTIFY THE DEFECTS POINTED OUT BY T HE REGISTRY ON OR BEFORE 15 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THIS ORD ER AND SHALL ALSO FILE THE PAPER BOOK, IF ANY, WELL IN TIME SO THAT T HE MATTER CAN BE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 10.03.2020. M.AS ARE ACCORD INGLY ALLOWED. 4. IN THE RESULT, M.AS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AL LOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH SEPTEMBER, 2019. SD/- SD/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 20 TH SEPTEMBER, 2019. VINODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1 SMT. VASANTHI BOLE, H. NO.1-63/3/1 PLOT NO.60 AMA R SOCIETY MADHAPUR, HYDERABAD 500034 2 ITO WARD 8(3) HYDERABAD 3 CIT (A)-2 HYDERABAD 4 PR. CIT 2 HYDERABAD 5 THE DR, ITAT HYDERABAD 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER