Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Service Integrator Inc., , Ahmedabad vs Assessee

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal27 February 2015

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal may recall an ex parte order and restore an appeal for fresh hearing on the merits where the assessee's non-appearance was due to reasonable cause beyond its control, and recall is necessary to secure substantial justice.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

आयकर अपीलय अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद यायपीठ 'A' अहमदाबाद ।IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL"A" BENCH, AHMEDABAD

ी मक ु ु ल कुमार ावत, या यक सद य एवं ी एन.एस. सैनी, लेखा सद य के सम% BEFORE SHRI MUKUL Kr. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Misc. Application No.122/Ahd/2014 IN ITA No. 3113/Ahd/2010 [Asstt. Year: 2007-08]

M/s.Service Integrator DCIT, CIR.11 301, Janki Nr. Parimal Crossing Vs Ahmedabad. Paldi, Ahmedabad.

PAN : AAQFS 4494 N

अपीलाथ'/ (Applicant) )*यथ'/ (Respondent)

Assessee(s) by : Shri Gaurav Nahta Revenue by : Shri Roopchand, Sr.DR

सन ु वाई क तार ख/ Dateof Hearing : 20/02/2015 घोषणा क तार ख / Date of Pronouncement: 27/02/2015

आदे श/O R D E R

PER MUKUL Kr. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

Through this Misc. Application, the assessee seeks recall of the ex parte order of the Tribunal passed in ITA No.3113/Ahd/2010 dated 4.4.2014 in the case of the assessee.

2. In the Misc. Application, the assessee has stated reasons for the non-appearance at the time of hearing that the business of the assessee had closed down and no staff was there, and therefore, the notice could not be received by the assessee. To this effect, the assessee has also filed an affidavit of Shri Sanjay N. Parikh, partner of the assessee stating on oath that the business of the appellant had MA No.122 of 2014 2

closed down and the premises was vacated by the firm and occupied by someone else therefore notice was not received by any of the partners, and hence no-one could appear on the appointed date. The learned AR submitted that the reason for the non-appearance is beyond the control of the assessee, and therefore, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee may be granted and the appeal may be heard de novo. The learned DR, on the other hand, objected to the recalling of the impugned order.

3. We have considered submissions of both the sides and perused the MA filed by assessee along with affidavit. From the reasons given in the MA, it appears that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause, due to which, the assessee could not appear before the Tribunal at the time of hearing of the appeal. Therefore, to meet the substantial justice, we recall the impugned ex parte order passed in ITA No.3113/Ahd/2010 dated 4.4.2014 and place the appeal for fresh hearing on merit. The next date of hearing is fixed on 14th May, 2015, which was announced in the Open Court and noted by both the sides, and therefore, Registry is not required to issue fresh notice of hearing to the parties in the matter.

4. In the result, the MA of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the Court on Friday the 20th February, 2015 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- Sd/- ( N.S. SAINI) (MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free