ASNEW BARRELS P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO 10(2), MUMBAI

ITA 5693/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 569319914 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-10-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 13-07-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PKB MENEN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B.RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. NO. 5693/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007 ASNEW BARRELS PVT. LTD. MUMBAI 400 071 PAN AACCA0165H VS. ACIT 10(2)(1) MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR APPELLANT : -NONE- FOR RESPONDENT : SHRI PKB MENEN DATE OF HEARING : 13-10-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13-10-2011 ORDER PER D. MANMOHAN, V.P. 1. THIS APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSE D BY THE CIT(A)-21, MUMBAI AND IT PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007. THE GROUND URGED BEFORE US IS THAT THE CIT(A) OUGHT NOT TO HAVE PASSED AN EX-PARTE ORDER WITHOUT GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 2. FACTS OF THE CASE REVOLVE IN A NARROW COMPASS. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASSESSEE PREF ERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON 5-5-2009 AND THE CASE WAS LIST ED FOR HEARING ON 5-3-2010 AND AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE THE CAS E WAS ADJOURNED TO 29-3-2010, 21-4-2010 AND FINALLY ON 30-4-2010. SINC E NO PETITION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED ON THAT DATE THE LEARNED CIT( A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL FOR NON-PROSECUTION. BEFORE US, THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY OUGHT NOT TO HAVE DIS MISSED THE APPEAL IN LIMINI WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE. E VEN OTHERWISE, THERE WERE BONAFIDE REASONS FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON THE DAT E FIXED FOR HEARING. WHEN THE CASE WAS LISTED FOR HEARING, A PE TITION WAS FILED ON 2 THE GROUND THAT THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT OF THE ASS ESSEE SHRI V.JAYARAMAN IS SUFFERING FROM ENLARGED PROSTRATE AN D HENCE, UNABLE TO APPEAR ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING. 3. HAVING REGARD TO THE OVER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE BENCH ASKED THE LEARNED DR AS TO WHETHER THE CA SE DESERVES TO BE SENT BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) TO DECIDE ON ME RITS IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE. LEARNED DR HAS NOT RAISED ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION IN THIS REGARD. 4. HAVING REGARD TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDE R OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND DIRECT HIM TO GIVE THE ASSESSEE A FRESH OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERITS. SD/- SD/- (B.RAMAKOTAIAH) (D.MANMOHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT MUMBAI, DATE 13 TH OCTOBER, 2011 VBP/- COPY TO 1. ASNEW BARRELS PVT. LTD., 221, SWASTIK CHAMBER, C ST ROAD, CHEMBUR, MUMBAI 400 071 PAN AACCA0165H 2. ITO, WARD 10 (2) (1), MUMBAI. 3. CIT(A)-21, MUMBAI 4. CIT, M.C.X, MUMBAI 5. DR A BENCH 6. GUARD FILE (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES MUMBAI.