IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, A BENCH, MUMBAI. BEFORE S/SHRI R.S.SYAL, AM & D.K.AGARWAL, JM M.A.NO.121/M/2010 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO.155/MUM/2008) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 SMT. MANJIT K. SINGH, V. THE ACIT, C.C. 40, B-203, POORNIMA APARTMENTS, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, 23, PEDDER ROAD, MUMBAI-26. MUMBAI. PA NO.AAQPS 4841 R M.A.NO.122/M/2010 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO.154/MUM/2008) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 SHRI KRIPAL K. SINGH, V. THE ACIT, C.C. 40, B-203, POORNIMA APARTMENTS, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, 23, PEDDER ROAD, MUMBAI-26. MUMBAI. PA NO.AAKPS 5890 C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANTS BY : MR M SUBRAMANIAN RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B.K.SINGH (DR) O R D E R PER D.K.AGARWAL, JM BOTH THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED BY ASSES SEES ARE DIRECTED AGAINST A COMMON ORDER DATED 2.7.2009 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.155/M/2008 AND ITA NO.154/M/2008 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. BOT H THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS ARE DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE O F CONVENIENCE. 2 2. IN M.A. NO.121/M/10, THE APPLICANT SMT. MANJIT K .SINGH VIDE HER PETITION DATED NIL SUPPORTED BY AFFIDAVIT DATED 9.2.2010 AND THE A FFIDAVIT OF HER CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT SHRI GOPALKRISHNA RAO DATED 2,2,2010, INTER ALIA, S TATED ON OATH AS UNDER:- 1. I SAY THAT ON 2 ND JULY, 2009 JUST BEFORE THE MATTER OF MRS MANJIT K SINGH WAS CALLED, I WENT ON TO FETCH MR SUBRAMANIAM FROM THE OTHER COURT WHERE HE WAS BUSY ARGUING YET ANOTHER MATTER. 2. I SAY THAT ON 2 ND JULY 2009, WHEN I RETURNED BACK ALONGWITH MR SUBRAMANIAM, THE HONBLE BENCH HAD ALREADY RISEN FO R THE DAY AND WE WERE INFORMED THAT THE APPEAL WAS HEARD EXPARTE AND AN E XPARTE ORDER HAS ALSO BEEN PASSED. 2. IN M.A. NO.122/M/10, THE APPLICANT SHRI KRIPAL K.SINGH VIDE HIS PETITION DATED NIL SUPPORTED BY AFFIDAVIT DATED 9.2.2010 AND THE A FFIDAVIT OF HIS CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT SHRI GOPALKRISHNA RAO DATED 2,2,2010, INTER ALIA, S TATED ON OATH AS UNDER:- 1. I SAY THAT ON 2 ND JULY, 2009 JUST BEFORE THE MATTER OF SHRI KRIPAL K SINGH WAS CALLED, I WENT ON TO FETCH MR SUBRAMANIAM FROM THE OTHER COURT WHERE HE WAS BUSY ARGUING YET ANOTHER MATTER. 2. I SAY THAT ON 2 ND JULY 2009, WHEN I RETURNED BACK ALONGWITH MR SUBRAMANIAM, THE HONBLE BENCH HAD ALREADY RISEN FO R THE DAY AND WE WERE INFORMED THAT THE APPEAL WAS HEARD EXPARTE AND AN E XPARTE ORDER HAS ALSO BEEN PASSED. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT FOR THE REASONS MENTIONED IN MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS, TH E EXPARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL BE RECALLED WHICH WAS NOT OBJECTED TO BY T HE LD D.R. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE RIVAL PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AFTER HAVING SAT ISFIED ABOUT THE REASONS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEES AND CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMS TANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON APPEAR ANCE OF THE ASSESSEES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ON THE DATE OF HEARING AN D, ACCORDINGLY, THE EXPARTE ORDER DATED 2.7.2009 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS RECALLED. PARTIES ARE TO APPEAR WITHOUT WAITING FOR ANY NOTICE ON 14.7.2010 AS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPE N COURT. 3 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIO NS STAND ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18.6.2010 SD/- (R.S.SYAL) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) SD/- (D.K.AGARWAL) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) MUMBAI, DATED 18 TH JUNE , 2010 PARIDA COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-C-VI, MUMB AI 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV, MUMBAI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH A, MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI 4 DATE INITIALS 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 18.6.2010 PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 18.6.2010 PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER AM/JM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER AM/J M 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER 5