H.M. Consultants Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi v. ITO, New Delhi

MA 475/DEL/2010 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 47520124 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAACH1947A
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number MA 475/DEL/2010
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 23 day(s)
Appellant H.M. Consultants Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi
Respondent ITO, New Delhi
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 07-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 07-01-2011
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 14-09-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH C DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI R. P. TOLANI JM AND SHRI K. D. RANJAN AM MISC. APP. NO. 475 (DEL) OF 2010. [ IN I. T.APPEAL NO. 3374 (DEL) OF 2008 ] ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200405. M/S. H. M. CONSULTANT P. LTD. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER 106 ASHOKA PLACE VS. W A R D : 12 (4) 877 EAST PARK ROAD N E W D E L H I. KAROL BAGH NEW DELHI. PAN / GIR NO. AAA CH 1947 A. ( APPLICANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : N O N E; DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI B. KISHORE SR. D. R.; O R D E R. PER K. D. RANJAN A.M. : THIS MISC. APPLICATION BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FI LED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15 TH DECEMBER 2009 PASSED BY THE ITAT FOR ASSESSMENT YE AR 2004-05. 2. THIS CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 15 TH DECEMBER 2009 AND WAS HEARD EX-PARTE AS NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASS ESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ON 15 TH DECEMBER 2009 THE APPELLANT VISITED TO THE CONCERNED COURT BUT DUE TO HEAVY TRAFFIC JAM AND RAIN THE DIRECTOR REACHED LATE TO ITAT AROUND 11 AM AND MET THE BENCH CLERK WHO TOLD HIM THAT THE PROCEEDING OF THE BENCH WAS CONCLUDED SINCE MOST OF THE ARS. COULD NOT REACHED ON TIME AT 10.30 AM AND MOST OF THE CASES WERE ADJOURNED. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED IN THE MISC. APPLICATION THAT THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL SINCE HE WAS ILL AND UNDER 2 MISC. APP. NO. 475 (DEL) OF 2010. THE TREATMENT OF DOCTOR. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS IT HAS BEEN PLEADED THAT NON-APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT WILLFUL AND THE ASSESSEE IS VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL AND HE HAS ALSO FILED PAPER BOOK AND SUMMARIZED / R EVISED GROUNDS OF APPEAL. THE LD. SR. DR ON THE OTHER HAND SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL . 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAD EXPLAINED THE REASONS FOR NON-ATTE NDANCE ON 15 TH DECEMBER 2009. WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFIC IENT CAUSE AS MENTIONED IN THE MISC. APPLICATION. WE THEREFORE RECALL THE ORDER FOR F RESH ADJUDICATION. THE APPEAL IS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 18 TH APRIL 2011 FOR WHICH NO NOTICE WILL BE ISSUED. BOTH THE PAR TIES WERE INFORMED IN OPEN COURT. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED ACCORDINGL Y. 4. IN THE RESULT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON : 07 TH JANUARY 2011. SD/- SD/-. [ R. P. TOLANI ] [ K. D. RA NJAN ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 07 TH JANUARY 2011. *MEHTA * COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPLICANT. 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CIT (APPEALS); 4. CIT 5. DR ITAT NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT.