PRAMILA ARVIND GANDHI, V. ACIT 19(3),

MA 176/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6414 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 27-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: VASANTIBEN PATEL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

1 MA NO NONO NO. .. . 1 11 176/MUM/2011 76/MUM/2011 76/MUM/2011 76/MUM/2011 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI MUMBAI MUMBAI MUMBAI C CC C BENCH BENCH BENCH BENCH MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI R S SYAL, AM & R S SYAL, AM & R S SYAL, AM & R S SYAL, AM & SHRI SHRI SHRI SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM VIJAY PAL RAO, JM VIJAY PAL RAO, JM VIJAY PAL RAO, JM MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO NONO NO. .. . 1 11 176/MUM/2011 76/MUM/2011 76/MUM/2011 76/MUM/2011 ARISING OUT OF ARISING OUT OF ARISING OUT OF ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 382/MUM/2010 (ASST YEAR 2006-07) SMT PRAMILA ARVIND GANDHI 4 SUSHEELA SADAN PERRY CROSS ROAD BANDRA, MUMBAI 50 VS THE ASST COMMR OF INCOME TAX 19(3), MUMBAI ( (( ( APP APP APP APP LICANT LICANT LICANT LICANT ) )) ) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. PAN NO. PAN NO. PAN NO. ADYPG 3227G ADYPG 3227G ADYPG 3227G ADYPG 3227G A SSESSEE BY SMT VASANTIBEN PATEL REVENUE BY SHRI V V SHASTRI PER PER PER PER VIJAY PAL RAO VIJAY PAL RAO VIJAY PAL RAO VIJAY PAL RAO, , , , JM JMJM JM THE ASSESSEE, THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATI ON, REQUESTS THE TRIBUNAL TO RECALL THE EX-PARTE ORDER IN ITA NO.382 /MUM/2010 DATED 10 TH DEC 2010 DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON PROSECUTION. 2 AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, WE ARE OF THE CONSI DERED OPINION THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE FOR SUCH NON APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING. WE, THEREFORE, RECALL THE ORD ER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND THE APPEAL IS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 22 ND JUNE 2011 WHICH WAS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. IT WAS ALSO ANNOUNCED THAT NO SEPARATE NOTI CE OF HEARING SHALL BE ISSUED TO WHICH BOTH THE PARTIES AGREED. 4 IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 27 TH , DAY OF MAY 2011. SD/- SD/- ( ( ( ( R S SYAL R S SYAL R S SYAL R S SYAL ) )) ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( (( ( VIJAY PAL RAO VIJAY PAL RAO VIJAY PAL RAO VIJAY PAL RAO ) )) ) JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: MUMBAI : DATED: 27 TH , MAY 2011 RAJ* COPY FORWARDED TO: 2 MA NO NONO NO. .. . 1 11 176/MUM/2011 76/MUM/2011 76/MUM/2011 76/MUM/2011 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT 4 CIT(A) 5 DR /TRUE COPY/ BY ORDER DY /AR, ITAT, MUMBAI