TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 1441X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment, it is clear that tribunal could not have dismissed the appeal for default and ought to have decided the same on merits. We are of the opinion that tribunal is misconceived on the issue raised by the appellant as the application was filed for recalling the order and not for rectification. In that view of the matter, the first issue we have decided in favour of the assessee. The tribunal ought to have reconsidered Rule 24 after amendment and having failed to do so, both the orders are quashed and set aside. The tribunal will decide the merit afresh. - D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 634 / 2009 - - - Dated:- 18-7-2017 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. JHAVERI AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH For the Appellant : Mr. Sandeep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ault or may hear it ex parte. Provided that where the appeal has been dismissed for default and the appellant appears afterwards and satisfies the Tribunal that there was sufficient cause for his non-appearance when the appeal was called on for hearing, the Tribunal shall make an order setting aside the dismissal and restoring the appeal. 3.1 After amendment w.e.f. 8.4.2002 Rule 24 provides as under:- 24. Hearing of appeal ex parte for default by the appellant.- Where, on the day fixed for hearing or on any other date to which the hearing may be adjourned, the appellant does not appear in person or through an authorised representative when the appeal is called on for hearing, the Tribunal may dispose of the appeal on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ex parte provided in Rule 24 but that was not done. The appeal has not been heard on the merits and the Tribunal erroneously held that the assessee's appeal is not maintainable in law. 6. Counsel for the respondent supported the order of the tribunal and contended that inspite of several opportunities, the appellant has not complied with the order and the order passed by the tribunal is just and proper. 6.1 He also contended that review application which was preferred before the tribunal was after 4 years and tribunal has rightly rejected the same having no power. 7. We are of the opinion that tribunal is misconceived on the issue raised by the appellant as the application was filed for recalling the order and not for recti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
