Udai Veer Singh, v. ITO,

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH LUCKNOW. BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI N.K.SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NO.25(LKW)/2010 (IN I.T.A.NO.107(LKW.)/2010) A.Y.: 2002-03 SHRI UDAI VEER SINGH VS. THE ITO 322 CIVIL LINES SITAPUR SITAPUR. PAN AOTPS2443C (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.R. RASTOGI C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ANADI VERMA SR.D.R. O R D E R PER H.L.KARWA VICE PRESIDENT THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BY THE ASSESSEE ARI SES OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 26.2.2010 PASSED IN I. T.A.NO.107(LUC.)/2010 RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. THE ASSESS EE VIDE HIS APPLICATION DATED 7.5.2010 HAS STATED AS UNDER : THAT THE APPELLANT FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE OR DER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) BAREILLY DATE D 11.02.2010 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. THE SAID APPEAL IS FIL ED THROUGH COURIER ON 11.02.2010. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEF ORE HON'BLE BENCH ON 26.02.2010. THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT HENCE APPELLANT WAS NOT AWARE ABOUT THE D ATE OF HEARING AND THEREFORE NEITHER THE COUNSEL OF (THE APPELLAN T NOR THE APPELLANT COULD APPEAR ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE H ON'BLE BENCH I.E. ON 26.02.2010. THUS THE NON APPEARANCE BEFORE THE HON'BLE BENCH ON 26.02.2010 WAS UNINTENTIONAL AS THE APPELLANT WAS N OT AWARE ABOUT THE DATE OF HEARING. 2 PRAYER IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER P ASSED BY HON'BLE BENCH VIDE ITA NO.107/LUCKNOW/2010 FOR ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2002-03 DATED 26.02.2010 MAY KINDLY BE RECALL. SD. (APPELLANT) PLACE: LUCKNOW DATED : 7.5.2010. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD.REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND HAVE ALSO CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE CONTENTS OF THE ABOVE APPLICATION. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE I.E. I.T. A. NO.107(LUC.)/2010 WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 26.2.2010. HOWEVER ON THE SAID DATE NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE APPEAL WAS TREATED U NADMITTED AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX (APPELLA TE TRIBUNAL) RULES 1963. IN THE INSTANT APPLICATION THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT NO NOTICE OF HEARING WAS RECEIVED BY HIM. HOWEVER IT IS APPARE NT FROM THE RECORD THAT NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGI STERED POST ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DUE ON 16.2.2010. THE SAID NOTICE W AS NOT RECEIVED BACK UNDELIVERED. IT IS PRESUMED THAT THE NOTICE OF HEAR ING WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. SHRI K.R.RASTOGI C.A. LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE NOTICE OF HEARING (FIXED ON 26 TH FEBRUARY 2010) WAS WHOLLY DUE TO THE REASON THAT THE NOTICE OF HE ARING COULD NOT BE RECEIVED AT THE END OF THE ASSESSEE EVEN THOUGH TH E ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN RECEIVED ON THE SAME ADDRESS. SH RI K.R. RASTOGI LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT T HE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY A REASONABLE CAUSE AND BONA FIDE REASON FOR NON- APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED BY THE REGISTRY OF I.T.A.T. CONSID ERING THE ENTIRE FACTS AND 3 CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE WE SET ASIDE TH E ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 26.2.2010 AND RESTORE THE APPEAL FOR HEARING SUBJECT TO PAYMENT OF COST OF RS.500. THE ASSESSEE WILL SHOW THE CHALLAN OF PAYMENT OF RS.500 TO THE REGISTRY OF THIS TRIBUNAL AND THEREAFTER THE RE GISTRY WILL FIX THE APPEAL I.E. I.T.A.NO.107(LKW)/2010 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 FOR HEARING. 3. IN THE ABOVE TERMS THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIO N IS ALLOWED. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 4.2.201 1. SD. SD. (N.K.SAINI) (H.L.KARWA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT FEBRUARY 4 TH 2011. COPY TO THE : 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) (4) CIT 5.DR. A.R. ITAT LUCKNOW. SRIVASTAVA.