TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 925X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of the order [ 2018 (1) TMI 1708 - ITAT DELHI] , whereby the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. Therefore, in our opinion, the said provision was not applicable for adjudicating the petitioner s application for recall of the order dated 24.01.2018. It appears, that the only avenue available to the Tribunal was as contemplated in Rule 24 of the ITAT Rules. While there was delay, the appellant seems to have furnished some reasons for explaining the delay. Broadly, the reasons given were that the notice of hearing issued by the Tribunal for the hearing on 24.01.2018 was misplaced, and did not reach the concerned officer of the petitioner, which according to the petitioner, was the primary cause for non-attendance on the said date. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t this stage, itself. 4. This writ petition seeks to lay a challenge to the order dated 07.09.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short Tribunal ]. 4.1 Via the said order, the Tribunal has dismissed the Miscellaneous Application bearing no. 606/DEL/2018, whereby a prayer was made for recalling the order dated 24.01.2018 passed by the Tribunal. 4.2 The Tribunal, on 24.01.2018, dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner, on the ground of non-prosecution. 4.3 A perusal of the said order shows, that the Tribunal noted that the petitioner had been served, and thus, no purpose would be served in issuing a fresh notice. 4.4 In the very same order i.e., the order dated 24.01.2018, the Tribunal also observes, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich is beyond the period of 6 months for disposal of the Misc. applications set out in the provisions of section 254(2) meaning thereby the Misc. applications should have been filed before 31st July, 2018. The assessee filed petition requesting for condonation of delay in filing Misc. applications. However, nowhere in the statute provides for condonation of delay in filing Misc. applications before the Tribunal under section 254(2) of the Act. Condonation of delay in filing Misc. applications by the Tribunal is beyond the powers of the Tribunal in the absence of any specific provision in the statute. In the circumstances the Misc. applications filed by the assessee are liable to be rejected. 7. As would be evident, the Tribunal seems ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e for default by the appellant. 24. Where, on the day fixed for hearing or on any other date to which the hearing may be adjourned, the appellant does not appear in person or through an authorised representative when the appeal is called on for hearing, the Tribunal may dispose of the appeal on merits after hearing the respondent : Provided that where an appeal has been disposed of as provided above and the appellant appears afterwards and satisfies the Tribunal that there was sufficient cause for his non-appearance, when the appeal was called on for hearing, the Tribunal shall make an order setting aside the ex parte order and restoring the appeal.] 9. A perusal of the said Rule seems to plainly convey, that if on the date f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on: (i) The petitioner has been denied depreciation allowance, amounting to Rs.53,31,982/- for the period in issue i.e., AY 2011-2012. According to the petitioner, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [ CIT(A) ] had denied the depreciation allowance to the petitioner, on the ground that the subject plants had been closed, and the plant and machinery was held only for the purpose of selling the same, in pursuance of the scheme framed by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) constituted under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. However, the petitioner claims, that in the previous AYs i.e., AY 2003-2004 to AY 2010-2011 and in AY 2014-2015, depreciation claimed with respect to the very sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|