TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 375X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich, 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not filed/not filed in duplicate and also statement of facts before CIT(A) was also not filed. In spite of issuing defect notice, till today no action has been taken by the revenue to rectify the defect as pointed out by the Registry therefore we are of the opinion that the revenue is not interested in prosecuting the appeal by rectifying the defect and accordingly considering the conduct of the revenue in not rectifying the defects in spite of issuing defect notice in June 2018 and we dismiss the grounds of appeal of the revenue. 1. It is clarified here that: a. This office had sent a letter dated 11.05.2018 to the Assistant Registrar, ITAT stating , Copies of Form 35 along with statement of facts before the CIT ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd therefore, we proceed to decide this MP of the Revenue exparte qua the assessee. 3. In course of hearing, learned DR of the Revenue submitted that the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed by the Tribunal on this basis that the Revenue has not rectified the defects. In this regard, it was his submission that the defect memo issued by the Tribunal on 28.06.2018 was addressed to ACIT, Circle 1(1), Bengaluru but the appellant in the present appeal was ACIT, TDS Circle 1(1), Bengaluru and therefore, the defect memo was not issued to the proper authority and as a result, the 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 the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DR of the Revenue and we find that the 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. We also find that 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h 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. 5. In the result, miscellaneous petition filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page. - - TaxTMI - TMITax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
