M/S Gour Bandhu Construction Company vs. Commisssioner , Income Tax-I

1 I.T.A. No.17/2011 14/8/2014. Shri H. S. Shrivastava, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Abhijeet Shrivastava, for the appellant. Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for the revenue. This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act is taken up for consideration with regard to the following substantial question of law :- “Whether

the

facts

and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal proceeding ex-parte and dismissing the appeal is a proper finding or not ?” An appeal filed by the appellant before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, has been dismissed on account of non appearance of the appellant. In ground D of the appeal it is indicated that the appeal was fixed for hearing on 24.8.2010, notice of hearing was received on the same date and as it was not possible for the appellant to go to the Tribunal on the same day they sent a registered letter on 25.8.2010 seeking adjournment. Documents supporting these assertions are filed as Annexure A/6 and 2 I.T.A. No.17/2011 A/7. Finding the reason for the absence of the appellant on 24.8.2010 to have been reasonably explained and there being no justification on the part of the Tribunal in proceeding ex-parte under such circumstances, we allow this appeal and hold that the Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case was not justified in proceeding ex-parte in the matter. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. Order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is quashed and matter is remanded back to the Tribunal to proceed in accordance with law and deciding the appeal on merit after hearing all concern. With the aforesaid, this appeal stands allowed and disposed of. (Rajendra Menon) (Alok Verma) Judge Judge mrs.mishra