IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM M.A NO.114/KOL/2018 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A NO.660/KOL/2016) ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) M/S. SHAPING DREAM PROJECTS PVT. LTD. 651A, BLOCK-O, 2 ND FLOOR, NEW ALIPORE, KOLKATA 700 053. VS. I.T.O, WARD-12(2), KOLKATA P-7, CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, KOLKATA 700 069. ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. : AAJCS 0549 J (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ARINDAM BHATTACHARJEE, ADDL. CIT, DR / DATE OF HEARING : 20/07/2018 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10/10/2018 / O R D E R PER DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM: BY WAY OF CAPTIONED APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS SOUGHT TO POINT OUT THAT A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961(IN SHORT THE ACT) HAS CREPT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 28.03.2018. 2. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS THAT ON THE DATE OF HEARING DATED 27.03.2018, THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ATTEND THE HEARING AS HE COULD NOT GET THE NOTICE FOR HEARING. THE ASSESSEE SENT THE NOTICE FOR HEARING TO HIS ADVOCATE SRI A.K. UPADHYAY AT GANDHI HOUSE, 8 TH FLOOR, 16, G.C. AVENUE, KOLKATA 700 013, BUT LATER ON WHEN THE ASSESSEE CONTACTED THE SAID LD. ADVOCATE, HE CAME TO KNOW OF THE FACT THAT THE SAID LD. ADVOCATE DID NOT RECEIVED ANY NOTICE FROM THE APPLICANT AND THUS HE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE DATE OF M/S. SHAPING DREAM PROJECTS PVT. LTD. M.A NO.114/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 PAGE | 2 HEARING SINCE THE OFFICE OF THE LD. ADVOCATE WAS SHIFTED FROM GANDHI HOUSE, 8 TH FLOOR, 16, G.C. AVENUE, KOLKATA 700 013 TO 8/2. KIRAN SHANKAR ROY ROAD, 3 RD FLOOR, ROOM NO.35 TO 37, KOLKATA 700 001, WHICH WAS NOT INFORMED BY THE LD. ADVOCATE AND THUS NOT IN KNOWLEDGE OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE COULD ATTEND THE HEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS REITERATED THE FACTS AS STATED IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION. 3. WE HAVE PERUSED OUR LOG BOOK FOR HEARING DATED 27.03.2018 AND WE FIND THAT THE FACTS NARRATED IN THE SAID MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ARE CORRECT. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THERE IS A MISTAKE APPARENT ON THE BASIS OF THE RECORD OF THE TRIBUNAL. WE ALSO OF THE VIEW THAT IT WOULD BE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 28.03.2018 SHOULD BE RECALLED. 4. ACCORDINGLY, WE RECALL THE ORDER DATED 28.03.2018 AND ALSO DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO FIX THE MATTER FOR HEARING IN DUE COURSE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 10/10/2018. SD/- (A. T. VARKEY) SD/- (A. L. SAINI) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /KOLKATA; DATED 10/10/2018 RS, SR.PS M/S. SHAPING DREAM PROJECTS PVT. LTD. M.A NO.114/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 PAGE | 3 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, HEAD OF OFFICE/D.D.O, I.T.A.T, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA . 1. / THE APPELLANT M/S. SHAPING DREAM PROJECTS PVT. LTD. 2. / THE RESPONDENT- I.T.O, WARD-12(2), KOLKATA 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A), :KOLKATA. 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. / GUARD FILE.