Case Law Details
Stella Maris Church Malpe Vs ITO (Exemptions) (ITAT Bangalore)
We notice that the date of hearing of the appeal i.e. 23.12.2021 was announced on the earlier occasion on 6.11.2021. On that day, the counsel of the assessee Smt. K. Soumya, Advocate has taken note of the date of hearing and hence there was no necessity to send notice of hearing to the assessee. However, the assessee or its counsel did not appear on the date of hearing on 23.12.2021 and hence, the Tribunal proceeded to pass the order ex-parte, without presence of the assessee. In the reason cited above, the assessee has stated that it did not receive notice of hearing and hence it could not be represented on the date of hearing. Since the date of hearing was taken note of by representative of the assessee, there was no necessity for the Tribunal to send the notice of hearing. It was also mentioned that the advocate was ill on that day. However, no material to support the above said contentions was filed. Thus, we notice that the reasons cited by the assessee for non-appearance on the date of hearing is vague and it cannot be considered to be sufficient cause for not appearing on the date of hearing.
It is pertinent to mention here that Rule 25 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 empowers the Tribunal to recall the order passed in the absence of respondent, if the respondent satisfies the Tribunal subsequently that there was “sufficient cause” for his non-appearance when the appeal was called on for hearing. In our considered view, the reasons furnished by the assessee for nonappearance cannot be considered as sufficient cause. Accordingly, we are of the view that the petition filed by the assessee deserves to be rejected.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE
The assessee has filed this miscellaneous application seeking recall of order dated 29.12.2021 passed in the hands of the assessee in ITA mentioned in the caption relating to assessment year 2015-16.
2. We heard the parties and perused the record. The assessee is respondent in the appeal filed by the revenue and the Tribunal passed order ex-parte, without the presence of the assessee. Hence the assessee has filed this petition seeking recall of the order, wherein the effective reason furnished reads as under:-
“It is respectfully submitted that the said notice of hearing had not been received by the principal officer of the Appellant and accordingly the case could not be represented on the date of hearing, also owing to the ill health of the advocate who had to represent the matter, the same was not adhered to from our end although the Appellant was ready with all the materials and evidence placed before the lower authorities. Had there been a hearing, the Appellant could have placed all the materials and evidence to justify the claims made in the grounds of appeal filed before the Tribunal. Thus, non-filing of evidence and materials which were already placed before the lower authorities was on account of non-receipt of notice by the persons handling the case.”
3. We notice that the date of hearing of the appeal i.e. 23.12.2021 was announced on the earlier occasion on 6.11.2021. On that day, the counsel of the assessee Smt. K. Soumya, Advocate has taken note of the date of hearing and hence there was no necessity to send notice of hearing to the assessee. However, the assessee or its counsel did not appear on the date of hearing on 23.12.2021 and hence, the Tribunal proceeded to pass the order ex-parte, without presence of the assessee. In the reason cited above, the assessee has stated that it did not receive notice of hearing and hence it could not be represented on the date of hearing. Since the date of hearing was taken note of by representative of the assessee, there was no necessity for the Tribunal to send the notice of hearing. It was also mentioned that the advocate was ill on that day. However, no material to support the above said contentions was filed. Thus, we notice that the reasons cited by the assessee for non-appearance on the date of hearing is vague and it cannot be considered to be sufficient cause for not appearing on the date of hearing.
4. It is pertinent to mention here that Rule 25 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 empowers the Tribunal to recall the order passed in the absence of respondent, if the respondent satisfies the Tribunal subsequently that there was “sufficient cause” for his non-appearance when the appeal was called on for hearing. In our considered view, the reasons furnished by the assessee for nonappearance cannot be considered as sufficient cause. Accordingly, we are of the view that the petition filed by the assessee deserves to be rejected. Accordingly, we reject the miscellaneous application filed by the assessee.
5. In the result, the miscellaneous application filed by the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29th Apr, 2022
