VS, 2008 PTD-INCOME-TAX-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-PAKISTAN 369 (2007)

Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)---

----S. 221---Rectification of mistake---Issuance of notice of hearing by registered post---Absence of assessee---Application for recall of order:--Endorsement on envelope supported the contention of the Authorized Representative that he was not available on the given address---Postal Department returned the envelope bearing notice of hearing with endorsement that "addressee was not available", but the Appellate Tribunal due to an oversight mistakenly observed that assessee refused to accept the notice of hearing---Absence of assessee side on the date of hearing was neither intentional nor deliberate---Order was recalled by the Appellate Tribunal in circumstances and restored the application.

Abdul Tahir Ansari, I.T.P. for Appellant.

B.A. Memon, D.R. for Respondent.

ORDER

Above Miscellaneous Applications (for recalling) have been filed on behalf of applicant/assessee, wherein the applicant prayed for recalling of consolidated order, dated 22-6-2006 passed by this Tribunal in M.A. (Rect) Nos.78 and 79/KB of 2006 (Assessment years, 1995-96 and 1996-97) respectively.

2. Learned A.R. Mr. Abdul Tahir Ansari, ITP has argued that notice of hearing was issued by way of Registered Post on his office address, as at that time he was out of Sukkur, therefore, notice was returned by the Postal Department with the endorsement that addressee is not available. Learned A.R. further argued that notice of hearing was neither served upon him nor on his client, therefore, his absence on the date of hearing was neither intentional nor deliberate but the learned Tribunal due to oversight presumed that assessee side refused to accept the notice and dismissed the Miscellaneous (Rectification) Applications in default.

3. Learned D.R. Mr. B.A. Memon opposed.

4. We have considered the arguments of both the parties and perused the record. Perusal of endorsement on the envelope supports the contention of learned A.R. that he was not available on the given address. Therefore, Postal Department returned the envelope bearing notice of hearing with endorsement that addressee is not available, but this Tribunal due to oversight mistakenly observed that assessee refused to accept the notice of hearing,. In these circumstances the absence of assessee side on the date of hearing of Miscellaneous Application for Rectification (already mentioned above) was neither intentional nor deliberate. Therefore, we have reasons to recall the order, dated 22-6-2006 passed by this Tribunal in M.A. (Rectification) supra and restore the same. Consequently, the A.R. (Roster) is directed to refix the same for hearing on any suitable date convenient to the Court.

5. Order accordingly.

C.M.A./176/Tax (Trib.)Order accordingly.