9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 555X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of India [1969 (4) TMI 103 - SUPREME COURT] it has been held that the aim of rules of natural justice is to secure justice or to put it negatively to prevent miscarriage of justice - the assessee has been represented through his counsel has repeatedly sought an adjournment - the assessee should not suffer on account of the fault of the counsel and considering the plea raised by the assessee before the Tribunal the matter is to be remitted back to the CIT(A) to decide the matter in accordance with law after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard – Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A .No.-3261/Del/2013 - - - Dated:- 3-1-2014 - SMT DIVA SINGH AND SHRI T.S.KAPOOR, JJ. For The Appellant : None For The Respondent : Sh. Neehar Ranjan Pandey, Sr. DR ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 19.12.2012 of CIT(A)-XXII, New Delhi pertaining to 2008-09 assessment year wherein various grounds have been raised by the assessee however the hearing was confined to Grounds No-1 2 which read as under :- 1. Because the action is being challenged on facts and law since having dismissed summarily, in v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The relevant finding is reproduced for ready reference:- 8. Decision 8.1 Notice dated 16.08,11 was issued to the Assessee fixing date for 30.08.11 at the address specified in the Form No.35 as the address to which notices may be sent to the Appellant. A letter was filed on 30.08.11 by Sh. Bhardwaj Tajender, CA, requesting for adjournment on which the case was adjourned to 15.09.11. A letter dated 16.09.11 was filed requesting that the date be adjourned to the mid of October 2011. The case was adjourned to 05.10.11 on this application, on which there was no compliance. Subsequently another notice dated 14.10,11 was issued, requiring compliance on 25.10.11. As no compliance was made on 25.10.11, another notice was issued on 25.10.11, on the address specified for correspondence in Form No. 35, for compliance on 11.11.11. No compliance was made again on this date also. Another notice dated 13.12.11 was sent for compliance on 22.12.11. In response to this notice, nobody attended nor any submissions were filed, but a letter dated 19.12.11 was received in Dak on 20.12.11 in which the Assessee has claimed as under :- In response to the notices issued for fixing the date of heari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was adjourned as requested to the third week of August and was fixed for 16.08,12. However, once again, despite the case being fixed in the third week of August on the specific request, there was no compliance on 16.08.12 and nobody even attended for seeking adjournment 8.7 Subsequently notice dated 18.09.12 was issued fixing date of hearing for 26.09.12. In response to this notice a letter dated 24.09.12, signed by Sh. Bhardwaj Tajender was filed in Dak on 25.09.12 as per which further adjournments were sought claiming that the Ld. Counsel is busy in filing the time barring Returns. This letter has stated as under :- In response to your notice for fixing the date of hearing on 26.09.2012, it is submitted that the undersigned is busy in Filling the time barring return till 30.09.2012 A/Y 2012-13. Hence you are requested to adjourn the date to some other day preferably in the month of November 2012. 8.8. Perusal of the above letter shows that it has been claimed that the Ld. Counsel was busy till 30.09.2012 in filing the Returns and if this was a genuine reason to seek adjournments then the adjournment of the case should have been sought for the month of October. However ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nnection with my Income tax Appeal and appellate proceedings for the A/Y . 08-09 and to produce my accounts books and documents as desired by the authorities from time to time. All their actions and statements will be binding on me and will be considered as have been made by me. 8.12 Thus it is clear that the Power of Attorney holders Sh. Bhardwaj Tajender, CA and Sh, Bharat Sehgal were fully authorized to represent the Assessee and also to produce his Books of Account and documents, and also explanations etc. In fact the Power of Attorney clearly states that all their actions and statements will be binding on the Appellant and will be considered as have been made by the Appellant. 8.13 In view of the above situation it is clear that there was no reason to wait for the client to sign the documents and both the Counsels could very well have done the same, Thus it is clear that the Appellant and also his representatives are not interested in prosecuting the Appeal as they have repeatedly either been seeking adjournment or non compliance is being made to the notices issued or on the adjourned dates, some of which were fixed on the specific request of the Appellant, still non c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The underlying principle of natural justice evolved under the common law is to check arbitrary exercise of power by the State or its functionaries. Accordingly, the principle by its very nature implies the duty to act fairly i.e. fair play in action must be evident at every stage. Fair play demands that nobody shall be condemned unheard. 5.1. In the celebrated judgement of the Apex Court in the case of A.K.Kraipak vs- Union of India (1969) 2 SCC 262, it is observed that the aim of rules of natural justice is to secure justice or to put it negatively to prevent miscarriage of justice. The said rules are means to an end and not an end in themselves and though it is not possible to make an exhaustive catalogue of such rules however it can be readily said that there are two basic maxims of natural justice namely audi alteram partem and nemo judex in re sua . In the present facts of the case we are concerned with the maxim audi alterm partem which again may have many facets two of them (a) notice of the case to be met; and (b) opportunity to explain. Their Lordships have cautioned that these rules cannot be sacrificed at the altar of the administrative convenience or celebrity. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
