Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (11) TMI 375 - AT - Income TaxRectification u/s 254 - defect memo did not reach to the appellant i.e., ACIT, TDS Circle 1(1), Bengaluru and hence, he had no occasion to rectify the defect pointed out by the Tribunal and therefore, in the interest of justice, this Tribunal order should be recalled to afford opportunity to the appellant to cure the defect - HELD THAT:- Appeal was filed by the Revenue on 04.05.2018 and defect memo was issued by the Tribunal along with first notice for hearing of the appeal being the hearing fixed for 05.09.2018 - this acknowledgment of notice is also addressed to ACIT, Circle 1(1), Bengaluru, issued on 28.06.2018 as per which, date of hearing was fixed on 05.09.2018. As per the order sheet entries in the appeal folder, we find that on 05.09.2018, Smt. Nandini Das, Additional CIT appeared on behalf of the Revenue and it means that the acknowledgment / notice issued by the Tribunal for fixing the hearing of the appeal on 05.09.2018 was very much received by the AO appellant and then only, Additional CIT, DR appeared before the Tribunal on this date i.e. on 05.09.2018. Having received the notice of hearing issued on the same date, the Revenue cannot take this stand that defect memo issued by the Tribunal was not received by the appellant Revenue. No merit in this contention raised by the Revenue in the MP and raised by the DR of the Revenue in the course of hearing of the MP that the defect memo issued by the Tribunal has not been received by the appellant Revenue. the said notice and the defect memo both were issued on the same date i.e. 28.06.2018 addressed to the same authority i.e. ACIT, Circle 1(1), Bengaluru, and we have already noted that on this date of hearing i.e. on 05.09.2018, Smt. Nandini Das, Addl. CIT, DR, appeared which implies that the notice of hearing issued by the Tribunal has been received by the appellant Revenue and therefore, this argument has no merit that the defect memo was not received by the appellant Revenue. In view of the above discussion, we hold that there is no merit in the MP filed by the Revenue and we dismiss the same. - Decided against revenue.
|