2012 (5) TMI 258

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... order dated 26.02.2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench 'B', Jaipur(hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), whereby the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue against the order dated 30.12.2008 passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals), Alwar. 3. Submission of the learned counsel for appellant is that appeal before the Tribunal was fixed on 09.02.2010. Counsel for the assessee had moved an application for adjournment of the case, in advance, on 08.02.2010 on the ground that he is going to Mumbai for some urgent work. The case was taken up on 09.02.2010. Application for adjournment, filed on behalf of Counsel for assessee, was rejected and the case was heard ex-parte and appeal of the Revenu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... order and original file of the Tribunal, which was summoned by us. 6. The substantial question of law, which arises for our consideration is "Whether, if a case is adjourned by giving a last opportunity to the Counsel for assessee, the same can be adjourned or not, again on the date fixed, if sufficient or reasonable cause exists on that day?"   7. Undisputed facts of the case are that appeal before the Tribunal was fixed on 11.01.2010 and at the request of the authorized representative, hearing of the case was adjourned to 09.02.2010, giving him a last opportunity. Counsel for assessee moved an application for adjournment of the case on 08.02.2010 as he was going to Mumbai for some urgent work. The appeal was taken up by the Tr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... absence of Counsel for assessee, rejected the adjournment application. Ordinarily, it is not incumbent on the part of the Tribunal to adjourn the case again when a last opportunity had already been granted to the Counsel for assessee, however, there may be number of circumstances where adjournment becomes necessary, in the interest of justice. If Counsel for assessee had to go for some urgent work to Mumbai and an application for adjournment was moved in advance, then in the interest of justice, a short adjournment should have been granted. If number of opportunities had already been afforded to the Counsel for assessee, then adjournment could have been granted, on payment of cost. The Tribunal has not assigned any reason as to whether rea....