IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO. 173/PN/2013 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.643/PN/2012) (ASST.YEAR: 2007-08) KISHORILAL KASHILAL RAMRAIKA, 54/2, D-II, MIDC, CHINCHWAD, PUNE PAN NO.AARPR9535N .. APPLICANT VS. DCIT, CIRCLE-10, PUNE .. RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.S. SHINGTE REVENUE BY : SHRI P.L. PATHADE DATE OF HEARING : 21-02-2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07-03-2014 ORDER PER R.K.PANDA, AM : THE ASSESSEE THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION REQUESTS THE TRIBUNAL TO RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL SI NCE THE SAME WAS DECIDED WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEE IN VIOLATION O F BASIC PROVISIONS OF SECTION 254(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REFERRING TO TH E MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ALONG WITH THE AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARING ON THE BOARD, A QUESTION WAS PUT TO THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ASKING HIM AS TO WHETHER THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS COVERED IN ITS FAVOUR BY TH E DECISION OF THE SPECIAL BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ACIT V S.BHAUMIK COLOURS PVT. LTD. REPORTED IN 118 ITD 1. ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE 2 REPLIED IN NEGATIVE, HOWEVER, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, WHEN ASKED CONCEDED THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE I S COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE SPECIAL BENCH CITED (SUPRA). ACCOR DINGLY, THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED AS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE AS SESSEE AND NO FURTHER ARGUMENT ON MERITS TOOK PLACE. HOWEVER, WH EN THE FINAL ORDER WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IT WAS SEEN THAT THERE IS NO WHISPER ABOUT THE DECISION OF THE SPECIAL BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF BHAUMIK COLOURS PVT. LTD (SUPRA). THE TRIBUNAL WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEE ON MERIT HAS DECIDED T HE ISSUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ACC ORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL BE RECALLED AND THE ASSESSEE BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO A RGUE ON MERIT. SINCE THE MATTER WAS HEARD ON THE GROUND THAT THE S AME IS IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND ULTIMATELY DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT HEARING HIM, THEREFORE, THIS IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD WHICH REQUIRES RECTIFICATION. 3. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ON THE OTHER HAND STRONGLY OPPOSED THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL ARGUMENTS MADE BY B OTH THE SIDES. IN THE INSTANT CASE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSES SEE WAS CONCLUDED AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON THE GROUND THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE SPECI AL BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF BHAUMIK COLOURS PVT. LTD (S UPRA). HOWEVER, INSTEAD OF DECIDING THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE THE 3 TRIBUNAL HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE ON MERIT AND DISMISS ED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE ON MERITS. THIS IN OUR OPINION BEING AN APPARENT MIST AKE, THEREFORE, WE RECALL THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL. THE RE GISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL IN NORMAL COURSE. THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07-03-2014. SD/- SD/- (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) (R.K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER SATISH PUNE DATED : 07 TH MARCH, 2014. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. DEPARTMENT 3. CIT(A)-V, PUNE 4. CIT-V, PUNE 5. THE D.R, A PUNE BENCH 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, PUNE BENCHES, PUNE