M/s. Sushil Traders, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Ahmedabad

MA 126/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2468 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 17-10-2014
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 25-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: VIJAY RANJAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD D BENCH BEFORE: ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUD ICIAL MEMBER M/S SUSHIL TRADERS, SHOP NO. 211-S.F. THE GRAND MALL, OPP. SBI ZONAL OFFICE, OPP. C N VIDYALAYA, AMBAWADI, AHMEDABAD-380015 (APPELLANT) VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3[4], AHMEDABAD (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI VIJAY RANJAN, A.R. REVENUE BY: SHRI NIMESH YADAV, SR.D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 17-10-2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31-10-20 14 / ORDER PER : ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- BY THIS M.A., THE ASSESSEE HAS PRAYED FOR RECALLIN G OF THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 583/AHD/2011 DATED 19/ 08/2011. M.A. NO. 126/AHD/2014 (IN ITA NO. 583/AHD/2011) ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 M.A NO. 126/AHD/2014 (IN I.T.A NO.583/AHD/2011) A .Y. 2007-08 PAGE NO M/S. SUSHIL TRADERS VS. ITO 2 2. BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE I T HAD CHANGED ITS OFFICE AND THE NEW ADDRESS WAS INADVERTENTLY LEFT O UT TO BE PUT ON RECORD OF HONBLE ITAT AND THEREFORE THE NOTICE COULD NOT BE SERVED. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOW FILED REVISED FROM NO. 36 WITH THE PRESENT ADDRESS AND IN SUPPORT AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO FILED. HE THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ORDER PASSED ON 19-08- 2011 BE RECALLED. LD. DR DID NOT SERIOUSLY OBJECT TO THE PRAYER OF LD. AR . 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO. 583/AHD/2011 WAS DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. NOW THE ASSESSEE HA S GIVEN REASON FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO BE PRESENT ON THE DATE OF HEARING IN SUPPORT OF WHICH AN AFFIDAVIT HAS ALSO BEEN FILED. IN VIEW OF THIS, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT BEING ABL E TO BE PRESENT ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND THEREFORE ORDER DATED 19-08-201 1 IS HEREBY RECALLED. HEARING OF THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FIXED FOR 02-12-201 4 AFTER TAKING CONSENT OF BOTH THE PARTIES. NO SEPARATE NOTICE WILL BE IS SUED FOR THIS. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MA FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE AT CAPTION PAGE SD/- SD/- (KUL BHARAT) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 31/10/2014 A.K. M.A NO. 126/AHD/2014 (IN I.T.A NO.583/AHD/2011) A .Y. 2007-08 PAGE NO M/S. SUSHIL TRADERS VS. ITO 3 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,