VIP INDUSTRIES LTD, V. DCIT CEN CIR 32,

MA 118/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3581 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 14-05-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 22-02-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: JAIDEV

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH F : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.K. AGARWAL, (JM) AND SHRI B. RAMAKOT AIAH ,(AM) MA NO.118/MUM/2010 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.4301/MUM/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 M/S. VIP INDUSTRIES LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ARISTOCRAT LUGGAGE LTD.) DGP HOUSE, 5 TH FLOOR 88C, OLD PRABHADEVI ROAD MUMBAI-400 025. ..( APPLICANT ) P.A. NO. (AAACU 0092 R) VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-32 AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD MUMBAI-400 020. ..( RESPONDENT ) APPLICANT BY : SHRI JAIDEV RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K. SINGH O R D E R PER D.K. AGARWAL (JM). THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECT ED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 7.9.2009 PASSED BY THE TRIBUN AL IN ITA NO.4301/M/08 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. MA NO.118/M/10 A.Y:05-06 2 2. THE APPLICANT VIDE HIS PETITION DATED 16.2.2010 SUP PORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI KRISHNA K. SHETTY, EXECUTIVE ACCOUNTS OF M/S. VIP INDUSTRIES LTD. DATED 20.2.2010 INTERALIA STATED ON OA TH THAT : 4. THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SERVED ON THE APPELLANT COMPANY AND THE SAME WAS KEPT IN MY DRAWE R AND IMMEDIATELY AFTER THAT I PROCEDED ON LEAVE AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME, WAS REMAINED TO BE SENT TO TH E AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE AND THEREFORE AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING, NOBODY APPEARED. 5. THAT, THEREFORE, THE APPELLANT COMPANY WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE IN NOT COMPLYING WITH THE NOTICE OF HEARING. IT WAS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE EXPARTE ORDER PASSE D BY THE TRIBUNAL BE RECALLED. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE SUBMITS THAT FOR THE REASONS MENTIONED IN ASSESSEES APPLICATION, THE EXPARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL BE RECALLED WHICH WAS NOT O BJECTED TO BY THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE RI VAL PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AFTER HAVING SATISFIED ABOUT THE REASONS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE RE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE OR HIS A UTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND ACCORDINGLY THE EXPARTE ORDER DATED 7.9.2009 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS RECALLED . PARTIES ARE TO MA NO.118/M/10 A.Y:05-06 3 APPEAR WITHOUT WAITING FOR ANY NOTICE ON 10.6.2010 A S ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION STANDS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14.5.2010. SD/- SD/- (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) ( D.K. AGARWAL ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 14.5.2010. JV. COPY TO: THE APPLICANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR BENCH TRUE COPY BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI. DETAILS DATE INITIALS DESIGNATION 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 7.5.10 SR.PS/PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 10.5.10 SR.PS/PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON 14.5.10 SR.PS/PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 17.5.10 SR.PS/PS 8 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER