MANTRA PROPERTIES,VARANASI V. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), PUNE, PUNE

MA 110/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Mantra Properties, the assessee, who filed a Miscellaneous Application requesting the recall of an ex-parte order that allowed an appeal filed by the Revenue. The assessee argued that they did not receive proper notice of the hearing due to an oversight, despite their request for notifications via email in an adjournment letter. The Departmental Representative (DR) contended that the Tribunal had passed a speaking order, which should be upheld. However, the Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument, leading to the recall of the ex-parte order and the setting of a new hearing date.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 848267 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Pune
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 18-12-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAILEE DHOLE
• Assessee Lawyers: V. K. JINDAL

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA No.110/PUN/2025 (Arising out of ITA No.2116/PUN/2024) Assessment Year : 2017-18 Mantra Properties S-20/53-1, Sunderam Villa, Cantonment Varuna Bridge, Varanasi, Utter Pradesh – 221002 Vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Pune PAN: AAOFM1283H (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri V.K. Jindal Department by : Smt. Sailee Dhole, JCIT Date of hearing : 27-03-2026 Date of pronouncement : 27-03-2026 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, VP : The assessee through this Miscellaneous Application requests the Tribunal to recall the ex-parte order passed by it allowing the appeal filed by the Revenue. 2. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to the MA filed by the assessee submitted that the notice of hearing dated 01.03.2025 of the Tribunal served through the Ld. DR fixing the date of hearing on 02.04.2025 was served by hand upon the Counsel of the assessee. He submitted that in pursuance to the same an adjournment letter dated 24.03.2025 seeking 15 days adjournment was sent to the Tribunal vide speed post and delivered to the Tribunal on 25.03.2025 evidence of which is placed on record. He submitted that in the said adjournment letter it was also requested that the notices of hearing be sent via email either on the email of Printed from counselvise.com 2 MA No.110/PUN/2025 the Counsel or mail ID of the assessee. However, no notice thereafter either through physical post or email intimated to the Tribunal was ever served upon the assessee from the office of the Tribunal or the Assessing Officer for which the assessee had no knowledge of the fresh date of hearing and therefore, could not appear on the appointed date of hearing. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to Rule 24 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 submitted that as per the said Rule, where an appeal has been disposed of ex-parte for non- appearance of the assessee then if the assessee appears afterwards and satisfies the Tribunal that there was sufficient cause for non-appearance when the appeal was called on for hearing the Tribunal shall make an order setting aside the ex-parte order and restoring the appeal. 3. The Ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the Tribunal has passed a speaking order. Therefore, the same should be upheld and the MA filed by the assessee be dismissed. 4. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the record. We find the Tribunal in the instant case has decided the appeal ex-parte after hearing the Ld. DR and allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that in the adjournment letter dated 24.03.2025, copy of which is available in the paper book, the assessee has requested that the notices of hearing be sent via email either on email of the Counsel or mail ID of the assessee. However, a perusal of the record shows that no such notice thereafter either through physical post or email intimated by the assessee in his adjournment letter has been sent. We, therefore, find merit in the Printed from counselvise.com 3 MA No.110/PUN/2025 arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that there was sufficient cause for non-appearance of the assessee when the name of the assessee was called for hearing. We find the provisions of Rule 24 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 read as under: “Hearing of appeal ex parte for default by the appellant. 24. Where, on the day fixed for hearing or on any other date to which the hearing may be adjourned, the appellant does not appear in person or through an authorised representative when the appeal is called on for hearing, the Tribunal may dispose of the appeal on merits after hearing the respondent: Provided that where an appeal has been disposed of as provided above and the appellant appears afterwards and satisfies the Tribunal that there was sufficient cause for his non-appearance, when the appeal was called on for hearing, the Tribunal shall make an order setting aside the ex parte order and restoring the appeal.” 5. Since the Ld. Counsel for the assessee before us has explained to our satisfaction that there was sufficient cause for his non-appearance on the date of hearing, therefore, we recall the order of the Tribunal and the appeal is fixed for hearing on 20.04.2026 which was announced in the open Court. It was further announced that no separate notice of hearing shall be sent and this order shall be treated as deemed service of notice, to which both the parties agreed. 6. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27th March, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 27th March, 2026 GCVSR Printed from counselvise.com Gajjala Chinna Venkata Subba Reddy Digitally signed by Gajjala Chinna Venkata Subba Reddy Date: 2026.03.27 17:55:40 +05'30' 4 MA No.110/PUN/2025 आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. 4. 5. The Pr. CIT concerned DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 27.03.2026 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 27.03.2026 Sr. PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Second Member JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member AM/AM 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Office Superintendent 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order Printed from counselvise.com "