9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (4) TMI 131X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ismissed the appeal. The miscellaneous application has been filed against the aforesaid order, seeking restoration of the appeal. We have gone through the contents of the miscellaneous application and we have also heard the rival contentions. It is stated in the miscellaneous application that Mr. Ruvala was out of India between 21-5-1998 and 17-7-1998. We have verified his passport which was produced before us and we find the averment to be true. On the facts and circumstances of present case, we are satisfied that the assessee had been prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause and had no opportunity of being heard. We therefore recall our order dated 20th July, 1998 and restore the appeal for fresh hearing. Registry will issue notices ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as under : "As our person has appeared in your office on 10-7-1998 with application for fresh date, but as you were on leave therefore Your person has not accepted our application for fresh date. Again on 13-7-1998 our person has appeared with the same publication for fresh date, at 10.20 a.m. but your person has not accepted the same as the appeal is about to be placed on the table for hearing within a few minutes on 13-7-1998. Mr. Rajan A. Ruvala is out of India and is expected on 20-7-1998, therefore we bequest you to give in fresh date for hearing after 20-7-1998." The original of the letter has again been taken by us on record. A reading of the aforesaid letter further shows that on the date of hearing, namely, 13-7-1998, some ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of hearing. Mr. Sonde at this juncture stated that generally difficulties arc felt because letters such as adjournment letters are not accepted even when they are filed days ahead of the date of hearing. While we confess that we do not know about what is happening generally in the office in such matters, atleast in this case there is evidence to show that application for adjournment dated 9th July, 1998 has not been accepted by the office of the Tribunal. This is quite unfortunate. The Registry should not refuse to accept such letters or tapals when they are filed much ahead of the date of hearing of the matter. They have to assist the public to the best of their ability and guide them properly in such matters so that genuine hardship ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mply with the procedural requirements of the Tribunal. The clerks or peons etc. do not have proper knowledge of the things and arc incapable of following what is being asked or to answer anything in such proceedings. They are also not the authorised persons. The assessee or his counsel should present himself in person on the date of hearing fixed to take notice of the orders of the Tribunal on the request application and/or further date of hearing. Alternatively, he may ask any of his colleagues at the Bar to present the application on his behalf. Tribunal is not supposed to adjourn or reply to the request of adjournments. The cases may not necessarily be adjourned and could be taken up for hearing causing irreparable loss to the assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
