2019 (7) TMI 285 - AT - Income Tax

Dismissal of appeal for non -prosecution - recalling of order - non appearance by assessee - assessee was not in receipt of notice of hearing - HELD THAT - AR brought to our notice that the assessee was not in receipt of the communication fixing the date of hearing on 26-06-2018. The assessee could not appear before this Tribunal on the said date of hearing (26-06-2018). We note since the assessee was not in receipt of notice of hearing, either the assessee or its ld. A/R could not appear before this Tribunal on 26-06-2018. Since the ld.AR did not appear, the assessee cannot be penalised. Therefore, for the ends of justice, we recall the order dt. 26-06-2018 and direct the registry to fix the appeals for fresh hearing on 26-12-2018.

Summary

Issues:
Miscellaneous applications preferred by the assessee against the separate order of the Tribunal dismissing the appeals due to non-appearance of the assessee.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata, delivered by Shri A.T. Varkey, JM, pertains to miscellaneous applications filed by the assessee against the Tribunal's order dated 26-06-2018, where the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 630 & 631/Kol/2015 for the A.Ys 2009-10 & 2011-12 were dismissed due to non-appearance. The ld. AR for the assessee highlighted that the assessee did not receive the communication regarding the hearing date on 26-06-2018, leading to their absence on the said date. Acknowledging this, the Tribunal noted that since the assessee was not in receipt of the hearing notice, it was justifiable that neither the assessee nor its ld. A/R could appear. Consequently, the Tribunal, in the interest of justice, decided to recall the order dated 26-06-2018 and directed the registry to schedule fresh hearings for the appeals on 26-12-2018 without the need for further notice to the assessee. As a result, both miscellaneous applications filed by the assessee were allowed, ensuring a fair opportunity for the assessee to present their case.

This judgment underscores the significance of proper communication between the Tribunal and the parties involved in legal proceedings. It highlights the principle of natural justice, emphasizing that a party should not be penalized for non-appearance if they were not duly informed about the hearing date. The decision to recall the order and reschedule the hearings demonstrates the Tribunal's commitment to upholding fairness and ensuring that all parties have a reasonable chance to present their arguments. By allowing the miscellaneous applications, the Tribunal rectified the procedural lapse and enabled the assessee to participate in the proceedings effectively. This case serves as a reminder of the importance of adherence to procedural requirements and the equitable treatment of parties in legal matters.