TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (4) TMI 284
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt assessment years starting from 1984-85 to 1989-90. The assessee did not participate in the proceedings before the learned Tribunal and the order dated February 23, 2001, partly allowing the appeals came to be passed in the absence of the representative of the assessee who was engaged to appear for the Tribunal. 3. The assessee thereafter filed a miscellaneous application on June 25, 2001, under section 24(5) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, read with rules 24, 25 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, for setting aside the ex parte order dated February 23, 2001. 4. In the said miscellaneous application, it was contended by the assessee that the date of hearing of the appeals was fixed on July 2, 1998, and the said da....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....plication filed by the assessee. The grounds stated for dismissal of the application, as is revealed from the order dated January 10, 2002, of the learned Tribunal was that since the postal department has confirmed the service of notice indicating the adjourned date of hearing, the assessee cannot have any grievance for non-receipt of the notice as the notice was concluded to have been duly served on the assessee. The duty of the assessee's counsel to enquire about the adjourned date of hearing as the earlier date of hearing was adjourned at the request of the assessee's counsel, who had personal difficulty in appearing on the stipulated date, was also noted in the order dated January 10, 2002, by the learned Tribunal. 8. Another reason ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s also contended on behalf of the assessee that providing an opportunity to participate in the appeal hearing before the learned Tribunal is a pre-requisite for a fair adjudication and since the assessee has been denied such an opportunity because of non-receipt of notice notifying the date of adjourned hearing, it is an appropriate case for directing fresh adjudication of the appeals by the learned Tribunal. 12. Dr. Todi, senior counsel has referred to the Allahabad High Court's decision reported in Ilyuas Ahmed Body Maker v. Commissioner of Sales Tax [1988] 69 STC 205, to contend that the Tribunal had the responsibility to notify even the adjourned date of hearing in order to afford a reasonable opportunity to the assessee and that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Revenue and obviously in this case the said requirement of rule 19 have been complied with. In the miscellaneous application dated June 25, 2001, itself the assessee clearly admits the receipt of the notice dated June 9, 1998, fixing the date of first hearing on July 2, 1998. However, on the fixed date, at the request of the assessee the hearing was adjourned. For such an adjourned date of hearing, I am of the opinion that the provisions of rule 19 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, does not apply. 16. It is provided under rule 24 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, that the Tribunal may dispose of an appeal ex parte on failure of the assessee to appear and participate in the said proceedings provided....