2019 (3) TMI 1681 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal grants rehearing, rectifying procedural error, upholding natural justice.

Sanjay Kumar Mehta Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax-19 (3), Mumbai

The tribunal allowed the miscellaneous application, recalling the order and directing the appeal to be reheard before a regular bench. The decision aimed ... Rectification of an mistake apparent - HELD THAT:- The serious prejudice is caused to the assessee as its appeal stood dismissed in the absence of representation from its counsel. Principles of Natural Justice demands in the instant MA before us that an order [2019 (2) TMI 1342 - ITAT MUMBAI ] passed by ITAT, “G” Bench, Mumbai be recalled and one more opportunity be granted to the assessee which will sub-serve interest of substantial justice, wherein at best the assessee will plead his case on merits in accordance with law. Thus, based on facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that interest of substantial justice will be best served in the instant case, if an order dated 22.10.2018 passed by tribunal is recalled and we hereby order recall of the order above. The Registry is directed to fix this appeal before regular bench in due course. The Registry will accordingly issue notice to both the parties intimating date of hearing in assessee”s appeal. Issues Involved:Rectification of an order due to alleged infringement of principles of natural justice by the tribunal.Detailed Analysis:The assessee filed a miscellaneous application seeking rectification of an order passed by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai, for the assessment year 2009-10. The appeal was decided ex-parte on 17.10.2018, with the assessee claiming that principles of natural justice were violated during the proceedings. The appeal was initially fixed before the 'J' Bench, but without notice to the assessee, it was shifted to the 'G' Bench. The assessee's counsel was out of station on the hearing date, and an adjournment application was rejected by the Bench, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The tribunal found merit in the assessee's contentions, noting that the appeal was shifted to a different bench without proper intimation, causing the absence of the arguing counsel. The tribunal accepted the bonafide explanation provided by the counsel and ordered the recall of the dismissal order to grant the assessee another opportunity to present its case.Thus, the tribunal allowed the miscellaneous application filed by the assessee, recalling the order dated 22.10.2018 and directing the appeal to be fixed before a regular bench for a fresh hearing. The decision was based on ensuring substantial justice and upholding principles of natural justice, acknowledging the justified reasons for the counsel's absence on the hearing date. The tribunal emphasized the importance of providing a fair opportunity to the assessee to present its case effectively, in accordance with the law.In conclusion, the tribunal's judgment focused on rectifying the procedural error that led to the dismissal of the appeal in the absence of the arguing counsel. By recalling the order and granting a fresh opportunity to the assessee, the tribunal aimed to uphold the principles of natural justice and ensure a fair hearing where the assessee could plead its case on merits.