VISION CORPORATION LTD V. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

SCA/7821/2014

AI Insights

The case involves Vision Corporation Ltd., the petitioner, who challenged the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench. The tribunal had initially dismissed the petitioner's appeal ex-parte on 15/04/2013 for the Assessment Year 2009-10 due to the absence of the assessee or its advocate. Subsequently, a Miscellaneous Application to set aside this ex-parte order was also dismissed by the tribunal on 13/09/2013. The petitioner sought judicial intervention under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, aiming to quash these orders and to have the appeal heard on its merits. The High Court of Gujarat, after hearing both parties, decided to restore the appeal to the tribunal, emphasizing the need for justice and fair hearing, provided the petitioner deposits a specified amount as a condition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 695552 (HC-GUJARAT)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: MANISH BHATT; MAUNA BHATT
• Assessee Lawyers: PREMAL RANCHH
• Keywords: Ex parte order; Income tax appellate tribunal; Miscellaneous Application; Quash and set aside; Reasonable cost
• Section: 16/Rajkot/2013

Judgement Text

"C/SCA/7821/2014 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7821 of 2014 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER ====================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ====================================== 1 - VISION CORPORATION LTD Petitioner(s) VERSUS 1 - JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Respondent(s) ====================================== Appearance: MR PREMAL S RACHH, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR MANISH BHATT, Sr. ADVOCATE with MRS MAUNA M BHATT, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ====================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER Page 1 of 4 C/SCA/7821/2014 JUDGMENT Date : 25/07/2014 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1. Leave to amend the petition with a prayer to challenge the original order passed by the tribunal dated 15/04/2013 dismissing the appeal ex-parte. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties, the present petition is taken up for final hearing today. 3. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner – assessee has prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and set aside the impugned order dated 13/09/2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench in Miscellaneous Application No.16/Rajkot/2013 and consequently to grant the reliefs as prayed in Miscellaneous Application No.16/Rajkot/2013 and also to quash the order dated 15/04/2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissing the appeal ex-parte. 4. Heard Shri Premal Ranchh, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Shri Manish R. Bhatt, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the revenue. It appears that the learned tribunal passed an ex-parte order dated 15/04/2013 in ITA No.48/Rajkot/2013 for the Assessment Year 2009-10 by which the learned tribunal dismissed the said appeal in absence of the assessee and/or its advocate. Page 2 of 4 C/SCA/7821/2014 JUDGMENT Thereafter, the applicant preferred Miscellaneous Application to set aside ex-parte order and to hear the appeal on merits. However by impugned order, the tribunal has dismissed the said application. 5. Having heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the period between the ex-parte order dismissing the appeal and the Miscellaneous Application submitted, it prima facie appears that as such there was no mala fide intention on the part of the assessee not to remain present at the time of hearing of the appeal before the learned tribunal on 15/04/2013. Under the circumstances and in the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that if on imposing reasonable cost upon the petitioner, one additional opportunity is given to the petitioner to submit the case on merits before the tribunal it will meet the ends of justice. 6. Shri Manish Bhatt, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the revenue has stated that he does invite any reasoned order while allowing the present petition and restoring the matter to the file of the learned tribunal to decide the appeal afresh in accordance with law and on its own merits. 7. Shri Ranchh, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has assured this Court that the representative of the assessee and/or its advocate shall cooperate in early disposal of the appeal and as and when the appeal is taken up for hearing, the learned advocate shall remain present. Page 3 of 4 C/SCA/7821/2014 JUDGMENT 8. In view of the above, the present Special Civil Application is allowed and the impugned order passed by the tribunal dated 13/09/2013 in Miscellaneous Application No.16/Rajkot/2013 as well as the original order passed by the learned tribunal dated 15/04/2013 dismissing the appeal ex- parte are hereby quashed and set aside and the appeal is restored to file of the learned tribunal on condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- with the Registry of this Court within a period of one week from today. On production of receipt before the learned tribunal, the learned tribunal to decide and dispose of the appeal in accordance with law and on its own merits. The representative of the petitioner and/or its advocate to cooperate with the learned tribunal in early disposal of the appeal and as and when the appeal is taken up for hearing, the representative of the petitioner and/or its advocate shall remain present. On deposit of the amount of Rs.5000/-, Registry is directed to transmit the same to the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted. (M.R. SHAH, J.) (K.J. THAKER, J.) Siji Page 4 of 4 "