MUKTA ARTS, V. ACIT 11(1),

MA 142/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1181 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 11-10-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 13-09-2013
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 17-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SHAMIT MAJUMDAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUM BAI .. , , BEFORE SHRI I. P. BANSAL, JM AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA , AM . /MA NO. 142/MUM/2013 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 6048/MUM/2011) ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09) MUKTA ARTS LIMITED MUKTA HOUSE, 3 RD FLOOR FILMCITY COMPLEX, GOREGAON (E), MUMBAI-400 065 / VS. ASST. CIT 11(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M. K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400 020 ' ./# ./PAN/GIR NO. AAACM 9513 F ( '$ /APPELLANT ) : ( %&'$ / RESPONDENT ) '$ ' / APPELLANT BY : SHRI SHAMIT MAJUMDAR %&'$ ( ' / RESPONDENT BY : MS. NEERAJA PRADHAN ) * ( +, / DATE OF HEARING : 11.10.2013 -./ ( +, / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.10.2013 0 / O R D E R PER SANJAY ARORA, A. M.: THIS IS A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BY THE ASSESSEE ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER DATED 26.11.2012 BY THE TRIBUNAL U/S. 254(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 (THE ACT HEREINAFTER) IN ITS CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR (A.Y.) 2008-09. 2 MA NO. 142/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2008-09) MUKTA ARTS LTD. VS. ASST. CIT 2. THE ASSESSEES APPEAL HAVING BEEN DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR NON-PROSECUTION BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITS IMPUGNED ORDER, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOW MOVED A PETITION, STATING THE REASON WHICH LED TO NON-REPRESENTATION BY IT ON THE DATE OF HEARING. THE SAME STANDS REITERATED PER AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 07.10.2013 BY MR. PARVEZ FAR OOQUI, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE APPLICANT-COMPANY. AS EXPLAINED, TH ERE HAD OCCURRED A CONFUSION QUA THE DATE OF HEARING IN VIEW OF TWO NOTICES OF HEARING H AVING BEEN RECEIVED, I.E., ONE FOR 24.07.2012 AND ANOTHER FOR 26.11.2012, WHICH STAND ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURES I AND III OF THE PETITION RESPECTIVELY; HENCE THE NON-REPRESENTA TION ON 26.11.2012. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES, AND PERUSED THE MATER IAL ON RECORD. THOUGH THERE HAS BEEN NO MISTAKE BY THE REGISTRY OF THE TRIBUNAL INA SMUCH AS THE TWO DATES AFORE- MENTIONED WERE SEPARATELY COMMUNICATED; THE FIRST O N THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF APPEAL ITSELF, WHILE THE SECOND FOLLOWS IT, IN VIEW OF NON -APPEARANCE ON THE FIRST DATE, WE ARE INCLINED TO CONSIDER THE NON-REPRESENTATION BY THE ASSESSEE AS ON ACCOUNT OF A BONA FIDE ERROR AT ITS END. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT THE RECALL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DISMISSING THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN LIMINE . THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (AR) DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEES APPEAL F OR A.Y. 2007-08, ON THE SAME ISSUE AS ARISING PER THE INSTANT APPEAL, IS FIXED FOR HEARIN G BEFORE THE SAME BENCH ON 21.01.2014. THE HEARING OF THIS APPEAL IS THEREFORE ALSO POSTED FOR THE SAID DATE, I.E., 21.01.2014 , EVEN AS CLARIFIED AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING. NO S EPARATE NOTICE OF HEARING WOULD IN VIEW THEREOF BE SENT TO THE PARTIES. WE DECIDE ACCORDING LY. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES MISCELLANEOUS APPL ICATION IS ALLOWED. 1/+2 31+ ( 4 + ( + 56 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON OCTOBER 11, 2 013 SD/- SD/- (I. P. BANSAL) (SANJAY ARORA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ) * MUMBAI; 7 DATED : 11.10.2013 3 MA NO. 142/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2008-09) MUKTA ARTS LTD. VS. ASST. CIT . ../ ROSHANI , SR. PS ! ' #$%& ' &$ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. '$ / THE APPELLANT 2. %&'$ / THE RESPONDENT 3. ) 8+ ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. ) 8+ / CIT - CONCERNED 5. ;< %+ = , , =/ , ) * / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. <>3 ?* / GUARD FILE ! ( / BY ORDER, )/(* + (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , ) * / ITAT, MUMBAI