SHAKUN GASES P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO 2(3)-2, MUMBAI

ITA 6038/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 603819914 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 04-08-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARTHA SARATHI NAIK
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH MEHTA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES E, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. B.R. MITTAL (J.M.) AND SHRI. J. SUDHAK AR REDDY (A.M.) ITA NO.6038/M/2010 (AY- 2006-07) SHAKUN GASES P. LTD. 702B MANMANDIR APT., INDR NARAYAN ROAD, SANTCRUZ (W), MUMBAI 400 049. PAN: AACCS2608D VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(3) - 2, MUMBAI - (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI RAJESH MEHTA RESPONDENT BY: SHRI PARTHASARATHI NAIK (D R) DATE OF HEARING:22/12/2011 DATE OF PRONOU NCEMENT: 22/12/2011 O R D E R PER B.R. MITTAL, JM: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST EX-PA RTE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A) DATED 9.3.2010 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. ONE OF THE SPECIFIC GROUND TAKEN BY THE ASSESS EE IS THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT (A) IS EX-PARTE AND NEITHER THE A SSESSEE NOR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE RECEIVED ANY NOTICE FOR H EARING. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS DEPRIVED OF AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL WAS DECIDED BY LD. CIT (A ) WITHOUT GIVING THE 2 ITA NO.6038/M/2010 OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND REITERAT ED THAT THE ASSESSEE AND/OR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT RECEIV E NOTICE OF HEARING OF THE DATE FIXED FOR. THERE WAS NO INTENTIONAL NON-COMPL IANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO ATTEND THE HEARING. LEARNED DEPARTMENTA L REPRESENTATIVE HAS NOT DISPUTED THE ABOVE SUBMISSION OF LEARNED AUTHOR IZED REPRESENTATIVE. 4. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE SUBMISSION OF LEARNED RE PRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE SET ASID E THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A) AND RESTORE THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE HIM FOR AD JUDICATION THE ISSUES INVOLVED ON MERITS AFTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AS PER LAW. HENCE, WE ALLOW GROUND NO.1 OF THE APP EAL TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. SINCE IN GROUND NOS. 2 & 3 OF APPEAL, THE ASSE SSEE HAS DISPUTED CONFIRMATION OF DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WE DO NOT CONSIDER NECESSARY TO ADJUDICATE THE SAME AS THE MA TTER HAS BEEN RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT (A) FOR HIS FRESH CONSIDERAT ION ON MERITS. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22/12/2011 . SD/- SD/- J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) (B.R. MITT AL) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 22/12/ 2011. 3 ITA NO.6038/M/2010 OKK* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- CONCERNED 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CONCERNED 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH E, MUMBAI TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI