Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Pakkar Leather Export Company , Chennai vs Acit Ncc-5 , Chennai on 11 May, 2018
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, 'डी' यायपीठ, चे नई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
'D' BENCH, CHENNAI
ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, या यक सद य एवं
ी अ!ाहम पी.जॉज&, लेखा सद य केसम)
BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
*व*वध या चका सं / M.P. No.32/Chny/2018
(in I.T.A. No.2015/Mds/2017)
नधा&रण वष& / Assessment Year : 2012-13
M/s Pakkar Leather Export Company, The Assistant Commissioner of
11/23, Vepery High Road, v. Income Tax,
D.No.8, 2nd floor, Periamet, Non-Corporate Circle - 5,
Chennai - 600 003. Chennai - 600 008.
PAN : AAAFP 6536 A
(-ाथ&क/Petitioner) (-/यथ0/Respondent)
-ाथ&क क2 ओर से /Petitioner by : Sh. Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate
-/यथ0 क2 ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. S. Vijayaprabha, JCIT
सन
ु वाई क2 तार ख/Date of Hearing : 11.05.2018
घोषणा क2 तार ख/Date of Pronouncement : 11.05.2018
आदे श /O R D E R
PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The assessee has filed the present Miscellaneous Petition praying for recall of the order of this Tribunal dated 01.11.2017.
2. Sh. Saroj Kumar Parida, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that the appeal of the assessee was posted on 01.11.2017. The assessee, in fact, received the notice of hearing 2 M.P. No.32/Chny/18 issued by this Tribunal. However, the assessee could not contact its representative. According to the Ld. counsel,the assessee was under the bonafide impression that one more opportunity will be given to the assessee since the matter was posted for first time. According to the Ld. counsel, since the assessee could not contact the representative immediately, he could not appear before the Tribunal. Hence, an opportunity may be given to the assessee to argue the case on merit.
3. We heard Ms. S. Vijayaprabha, the Ld. Departmental Representative also. It is not in dispute that the assessee received notice of hearing issued by this Tribunal and it could not contact the representative immediately for making arrangement to appear before this Tribunal. There may be various reasons for the assessee which prevented it from contacting the representative. Whatever may be the reason, the income-tax proceeding is only to quantify the taxable income and levy tax thereon. Therefore, giving one more opportunity to the assessee to argue the case on merit would not prejudice the interests of Revenue in any way. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that giving one more opportunity to the assessee would promote the cause of justice. 3 M.P. No.32/Chny/18
4. It is also necessary to keep in mind that the Revenue can recover and retain the tax if it is authorized by law. Therefore, hearing the appeal on merit may not prejudice the interests of Revenue in any way. In view of the above, the order of this Tribunal dated 01.11.2017 stands recalled and the appeal of the assessee in I.T.A. No.2015/Mds/2017 stands restored on the file of this Tribunal. The Registry is directed to post the appeal for final disposal on 31.07.2018. Since the date of hearing is announced in the presence of both the parties, it may not be necessary for the Registry to issue a separate notice of hearing. In other words, a copy of this order shall be treated as notice for hearing on 31.07.2018.
5. With the above observation, the Miscellaneous Petition filed by the assessee stands allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 11th May, 2018 at Chennai.
sd/- sd/-
(अ!ाहम पी.जॉज&) (एन.आर.एस. गणेशन)
(Abraham P. George) (N.R.S. Ganesan)
लेखा सद य/Accountant Member या यक सद य/Judicial Member
चे नई/Chennai,
th
9दनांक/Dated, the 11 May, 2018.
Kri.
4 M.P. No.32/Chny/18
आदे श क2 - त:ल*प अ;े*षत/Copy to:
1. -ाथ&क/Petitioner
2. -/यथ0/Respondent
3. आयकर आयु<त (अपील)/CIT(A)
4. आयकर आयु<त/CIT
5. *वभागीय - त न ध/DR
6. गाड& फाईल/GF.