Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh
Tara Health Foods Ltd., Malerkotla vs Dcit, Ludhiana on 22 February, 2021
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ "बी", च डीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
CHANDIGARH BENCH 'B' , CHANDIGARH
ीमती दवा संह, याय!क सद"य एवं ीमती अ नपण
ू ा& गु(ता, लेखा सद"य
BEFORE SMT.DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
MA No.116/Chd/2018
In
आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.1036/Chd/2013
नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2010-11
Tara Health Foods Ltd., बनाम The D.C.I.T.,
Village Jitwal Kalan, Central Circle-I,
Tehsil Malerkotla. Ludhiana.
थायी लेखा सं./ PAN:AACCT3940R
अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent
नधा रती क ओर से/Assessee by: Shri Atul Goyal, CA.
राज व क ओर से/ Revenue by: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl.CIT
सन
ु वाई क तार$ख/Date of Hearing : 16.02.2021
उदघोषणा क तार$ख/Date of Pronouncement: 22.02.2021
(Virtual Court)
आदे श/ORDER
Per Anna pur na G upta, Account ant Member :
Th e p re se n t M i s c e l l a n e o u s A p p l i c a t i o n h a s b e e n f i l e d by the assessee for recalling the order of the Tri bu nal dated 2 9.04.2 015 in I TA No.1036 /Chd /2013 re lati ng to 2 MA No.116/Chd/2018 A.Y.2010-11 as sess me nt year 2 01 0-11 , w hich was dismissed ex-parte for want of prosecution.
2. The applicant, in its application submitted the reason for not attending the hearing on 29.04.2015 as under:
"T he appellan t assessee f iled the application under Section 254(2) f or the recalling of the ex parte order dated 29.04.2015 passed by the Hon'ble IT AT Bench f or non prosecution by the appellan t. T he appellant assessee makes f ollo wing submissions with a request f or the recall of the appellate order.
(a) The appellan t assessee had engaged a counsel for appearance for and on our behalf in the case. Our counsel appeared on our behalf on the preceding date of hearing and sought adjournmen t and the same was adjourned on his request. T he po wer of attorney duly signed by the authorized represen tative was given to the counsel and should have been placed on record of the Hon'ble T ribunal. The appellant assessee did no t receive notice of hearing f or 29.04.2015. Ho wever, the Hon'ble Bench may have provided adjournmen t f or the said date to our counsel. However, on the above mentioned date, as per the decision of the Hon'ble IT AT , no one appeared on behalf of the assessee on 29.04.2015 i.e. the counsel engaged by the assessee did not appear bef ore the Hon'ble Bench. Since , the date of f ixation f or 29.04.2015 was not communicated to the assessee and the counsel authorized to appear on behalf of the assessee f ailed to appear without any intimation to the assessee about the same, the assessee being in bona f ide belief that the duly au thorized counsel shall appear bef ore the Hon'ble Bench. The f ailure of the counsel to appear cannot and should not be 3 MA No.116/Chd/2018 A.Y.2010-11 taken as negligence of the appellant assessee and the assessee theref ore, requests that the order be recalled to serve the in terest of justice."
3. In support of the above the assessee has also filed affidavit of Shri Balwant Singh, Director of the assessee company The Ld. DR objected to the same.
4. We have heard the parties. It is a matter of record that the assessee was being represented by a duly authorized Counsel on whose request the hearing of the appeal was adjourned to 29/04/15,the non attendance of which date resulted in the dismissal of the appeal. Th e present Miscellaneous application, we have noted is being re prese nted by a d iffe re nt counsel . The contenti on of the assessee ,stated on oath, that it was under the belief that since the counsel was pursuing the appeal , it was unaware of the notice of hearing, which was given in the open court, does not justify the non attendance of hearing ,since the authorized representative for all purposes r e p r e s e n t s t h e a s s e s s e e . Th e s a m e w a s p o i n t e d o u t t o t h e Ld.Counsel for the assessee who fairly acknowledged the 4 MA No.116/Chd/2018 A.Y.2010-11 same and u ndertook to en sure th at such lap se on the part of the assessee would not occur in the future.
5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances we are of the view that though the non attendance of hearing is not justified, but at the same time the possibility of the assessee being unaware of the notice of hearing of appeal cannot be completely ruled out. Further considering that the assessee, represented by its director, has admitted on oath the facts leading to its negligence and has undertaken before us not to repeat the same in future, we are of the view that to meet the ends of natural justice the assessee ought to be given a fair opportunity o f h e a r i n g . Th e r e f o r e e x e r c i s i n g t h e p o w e r o f t h e T r i b u n a l pr ovide d in the p roviso to Rule s 24 and 2 5 of the I TA T Rules 1963, to set aside an ex-parte order and restore the appeal in case where an assessee demonstrates reasonable cause for non-appearance, and considering the entirety of facts in the present case, we are of the view that this is a fit case for recalling the order for fresh hearing, which we hereby do. The Registry is directed to fix the hearing of the appeal on 24.03.2021, which was 5 MA No.116/Chd/2018 A.Y.2010-11 noted by both the parties. No separate notice be issued to the parties.
6. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the applicant is allowed.
O r de r p r o n o u n ce d o n 2 2 . 0 2 . 2 0 2 1 .
Sd/- Sd/-
दवा संह अ नपण
ू ा& ग(ु ता
(DIVA SINGH ) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA)
याय!क सद"य/Judicial Member लेखा सद"य/Accountant Member
दनांक /Dated: 22nd February, 2021
*रती*
आदे श क त*ल+प अ,े+षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant
2. यथ / The Respondent
3. आयकर आयु-त/ CIT
4. आयकर आयु-त (अपील)/ The CIT(A)
5. +वभागीय त न0ध, आयकर अपील$य आ0धकरण, च2डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH
6. गाड फाईल/ Guard File आदे शानस ु ार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar