M/s. Nik-San Engineering Co. (P) Ltd., Mumbai V. The DCIT, Circle 4, Baroda

MA 148/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1030 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 22-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 18-10-2013
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 23-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P L KUREEL

Judgement Text

M.A. NO. 148/A/2013( IN ITA NO. 2559/A/12 . A.Y. 2009- 10 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI G.C.GUPTA VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI ANIL C HATURVEDI, A.M.) M. A. NO. 148/AHD/2013 (IN ITA NO. 25 59/AHD/2012) (ASSESSMENT YE AR:2009-10) M/S. NIK-SAN ENGINEERING CO. PVT. LTD., 201-204, VIKAS CHAMBER, JUNCTION OF LINK & MARVE ROAD, MUMBAI 400064 (APPELLANT) VS. THE D.C.I.T. CIRCLE 4, BARODA (RESPONDENT) PAN: AABCN8963D APPELLANT BY : SHRI MUKUND BAKSHI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.L. KUREEL, SR. D.R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 18-102013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22-11-2013 PER SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI,A.M. 1. BY THIS M.A. THE ASSESSEE HAS REQUESTED FOR RECALLI NG OF THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 2559/AHD/2012 DATED 22 .02.2013. M.A. NO. 148/A/2013( IN ITA NO. 2559/A/12 . A.Y. 2009- 10 2 2. THE LEARNED A.R. HAS EXPLAINED THE REASONS FOR NOT APPEARING ON THE DATE OF HEARING WAS DUE TO THAT AROUND 17.02.2013, THE C OMPANYS COUNSEL SHRI MUKUND BAKSHI DESIRED FURNISHING OF CERTAIN D OCUMENTS/ INFORMATION FOR SUBMISSIONS FOR CONDUCTING THE HEAR ING BEFORE THE HON. TRIBUNAL ON 20.02.2013 AND AT THAT TIME SHRI SUNIL DESHMUKH, CHIEF MANAGER (ACCOUNTS) OF THE COMPANY WAS REQUIRED TO A TTEND CERTAIN OFFICIAL WORK AT MUMBAI WHERE THE REGISTERED OFFICE OF THE COMPANY IS SHIFTED AND, THEREFORE, THE COUNSEL WAS INSTRUCTED TO SEEK A SHORT ADJOURNMENT AND ACCORDINGLY, AN APPLICATION WAS FIL ED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPANY ON 19.02.2013 AND IT WAS UNDER BONAFIDE BEL IEF THAT THE ADJOURNMENT WOULD BE GRANTED. HOWEVER ON RECEIPT OF THE ORDER, IT IS REALIZED THAT THE REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS DECLI NED BY THE HON. TRIBUNAL VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 22.02.2013 IN ITA NO. 2559/AHD/2012 OBSERVING THAT THE COMPANY IS NO MORE INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. THE LD. A.R. THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT THE A SSESSEE IS INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL AND THEREFORE THE ORDER BE R ECALLED. THE LD. D.R. DID NOT SERIOUSLY OBJECT TO THE REQUEST OF ASSESSEE . 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. CONSIDERING TH E FACTS AS NOTED ABOVE, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE C AUSE FOR NON- APPEARANCE OF THE LEARNED A.R. ON THE APPOINTED DAT E OF HEARING AND HENCE, WE RECALL THE EX-PARTE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 2 559/AHD/2012 ORDER DATED 22.02.2013 AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO FIX THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 18.12.2013. BOTH PARTIES WERE INFORMED IN COURT AN D THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS DISPENSED WITH THE CONSENT OF BOTH PART IES. SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT, NO SEPARA TE NOTICE IS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED. M.A. NO. 148/A/2013( IN ITA NO. 2559/A/12 . A.Y. 2009- 10 3 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 22 -11 - 2013. SD/- SD/- (G.C.GUPTA) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD. TRUE COPY RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHME DABAD