TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal recalls ex-parte order, emphasizes procedural fairness in tax matters.</h1> The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Pune, in a judgment by Ms. Sushma Chowla, JM, recalled an ex-parte order due to non-receipt of notice by applicants, ... Ex-parte - no notice of hearing was received by assessee - Assessee prevented by sufficient cause from non-appearance as they have not received notice - due date for filing the return of income in the case under section 139(4) was 31.03.2014 as against 31.03.2013 mentioned in the order of Tribunal - HELD THAT:- The Tribunal [2019 (1) TMI 875 - ITAT PUNE] had decided the present appeals following the case of Humayun Suleman Merchant Vs. CCIT [2016 (9) TMI 70 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT]. The appeals of applicants were decided ex-parte in view of the issue being decided by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court (supra) - find merit in the plea of applicants and the order of Tribunal is recalled for regular hearing. The Registry is directed to fix the appeals in regular course and issue notice to both the parties. The Miscellaneous Applications filed by the applicants are thus, allowed. Issues:1. Non-receipt of notice leading to ex-parte order2. Discrepancy in due date for filing return of income3. Application of Bombay High Court's decision in similar caseAnalysis:The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Pune, delivered by Ms. Sushma Chowla, JM, pertains to Miscellaneous Applications filed by various applicants against a consolidated order of the Tribunal dated 31.12.2018. The applicants raised concerns regarding not receiving a notice of hearing, which resulted in an ex-parte order being passed in their cases. The Authorized Representative for the applicants argued that they were unable to appear due to not receiving the notice and highlighted discrepancies in the due date for filing the return of income under section 139(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as mentioned in the Tribunal's order. It was also noted that the applicants had deposited the amount in the Capital Gains Account Scheme and provided evidence of purchasing a new asset before the due date for filing the return of income.The Tribunal, basing its decision on the precedent set by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Humayun Suleman Merchant Vs. CCIT, decided to recall the ex-parte order and allow regular hearing of the appeals. The Tribunal found merit in the applicants' plea, considering the circumstances and the decision of the Bombay High Court. Consequently, the order of the Tribunal was recalled, and the appeals were directed to be fixed for regular hearing, with notices to be issued to both parties. As a result, all the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the applicants were allowed, providing them with the opportunity for a fair hearing.In conclusion, the judgment addressed the issues of non-receipt of notice leading to an ex-parte order, discrepancies in the due date for filing the return of income, and the application of the Bombay High Court's decision in a similar case. The decision to recall the order and allow regular hearing demonstrates the importance of ensuring procedural fairness and adherence to legal requirements in tax matters.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
