9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 780X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jpayee is junior standing counsel today for the department. Moreover, the Applicant s explanation for non removal of objection contains only conjectures. He says that in between change in the standing counsel of the department may be the reason for non appearance ; there is a possibility of communication gap can be between standing counsel and then AO. , the new officer may not have been fully aware of dismissal of this case. As stated in the Affidavit in Reply, the department was constantly participating in the proceedings before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on the existence of M.N. Navale Bigger HUF. Therefore, it is inconceivable that during the period 2012 19, the Authority never once enquired about the status of the Appeal befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y case by 16th March 2016 and why nobody appeared on 16th March 2016 and still the application has been affirmed only on 4th February 2020 but lodged on 4th March 2020 and how after four years applicant realised that the appeal had been dismissed. This further affidavit shall be filed and copy served within two weeks from today. Respondent may file a reply to this application as well as to the additional affidavit to be filed and serve a copy thereof within a week of receiving a copy of the additional affidavit. 3. Application to be listed for hearing on 7th September 2021. 2. Admittedly, there is a delay of 1419 days in filing this application for restoration. 3. On 28th August, 2014, Applicant was directed to remove all offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the reason for non appearance .... ; there is a possibility of communication gap can be between standing counsel ..... and then AO...... , the new officer may not have been fully aware of dismissal of this case.... . 5. In paragraph 7, the Applicant states that while constructing the factual background of this issue in case of M.N. Navale Bigger HUF (AY 2001 2002 to 2007 2008), it was noticed that the Appeal recorded the issue of existence of M.N. Navale HUF .., He does not say on which date and who noticed it. 6. As stated in the Affidavit in Reply, the department was constantly participating in the proceedings before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on the existence of M.N. Navale Bigger HUF. Therefore, it is inconceivable that d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
