Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “B-SMC”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 133/Hyd/2019 (In ITA No.695/Hyd/2019) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. PasupuletiSrivani, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Warangal. Ward-4 PAN: ACUPP 6625 Q Warangal. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri Vinod Kumar Revenue by: Sri N. Murthy Naik, DR Date of hearing: 13/12/2019 Date of pronouncement: 13/12/2019 ORDER
This Miscellaneous Application is filed by the assessee U/s. 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking rectification of the Tribunal order dated 18/11/2019 passed in ITA No.695/Hyd/2019, dated 18/11/2019.
At the outset, the Ld. AR of the assessee drew my attention to the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee wherein it was submitted as follows:
“4. It is submitted that the Authorized Representative has appeared on behalf of the assessee before the Hon’ble Tribunal on 18/11/2019 to represent the assessee’s case.
It is further submitted that the Hon’ble Tribunal has considered the proceedings and pronounced in the open Court on 18thNovember, 2019 as “referring the case back to the Assessing Officer”. 6. However, the Actual Order due to clerical Mistake state as “None Appeared before the Hon’ble Bench to represent the assessee’s case and therefore dismissed the appeal of the assessee as not maintainable.”
Explaining the above facts, the Ld. AR pleaded that the impugned Tribunal order dated 18/11/2019 may be rectified and appropriate orders may be passed as the Tribunal deems fit. On the other hand, Ld. DR could not controvert to the submissions of the Ld. AR.
On perusing the materials on record, I find the submission of the Ld. AR to be correct. Since, inadvertently amistake had occurred in the order sheet by mentioning “none appeared”, whereas the ld. AR had appeared and requested for the matter to be remitted back to the file of the Ld. AO in order to provide the assessee with one more opportunity of being heard, which the Bench conceded, the order of the Tribunal is required to be recalled and rectified as there is a mistake apparent on record. It is apparent that the Ld. CIT (A) had passed ex-parte order since the assessee had not appeared before him on the date of hearing. It is also evident that the assessee has not appeared before the Ld. AO also and therefore, the ld. AO passed ex- parte order U/s. 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act. Since, the ld. AR now
requests for providing one more opportunity to pursue his case, in the interest of justice, I recall the order passed by me earlier and remit the appeal back to the file of the Ld. AO for de-novo consideration thereby providing the assessee with one more opportunity of being heard. However, I also make it clear that even now if the assessee and his Counsel do not co-operate before the ld. Revenue Authorities promptly in their proceedings, they shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders in accordance with merit and law based on the materials on record. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, MA filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove.
Pronounced in the open Court on 13thDecember, 2019.
Sd/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 13thDecember, 2019
OKK Copy to:- 1) Smt. PasupuletiSrivani W/o. P. Bhaskar Rao, Villa No.8, Ramky Enclave, Narasampet Road, Near Railway Station, Warangal. 2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Aayakar Bhavan, Station Road, Warangal. 3) The CIT(A)-3, Hyderabad. 4) The Pr. CIT-3, Hyderabad. 5) The DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 6) Guard File