Shri Indrajit Zandusingh Tomar, Surat V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2), Surat

MA 181/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5504 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 07-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: MONIL SHAH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH BEFORE: SHR I RAJPAL YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER INDRAJEET ZANDUSINGH TOMAR, R - 102, ROHIT AC MARKET, RING ROAD, SURAT - 395002 PAN: AAMPT5768L (APPELLANT) VS THE ITO, WARD - 9(2), SURAT (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI RAJESH MEENA , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: S H RI MONIL SHAH , A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 07 - 04 - 2 017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18 - 04 - 2 017 / ORDER P ER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R : - THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION AGAINST THE ITAT ORDER DATED 23/09/ 2016 IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 22/AHD/2014. VIDE THIS ORDER, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSSESSEE WAS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION (NOT ATTENDING THE H EARING). M.A. NO. 181/AHD/2016 (I N I T A NO . 22 / A HD/20 14) A SSESSMENT YEAR 200 8 - 09 M.A. 181/AHD/2016 (IN I.T.A NO. 22/AHD/2014) A.Y. 2008 - 09 PAGE NO INDRAJEET ZANDUSINGH TOMAR VS. ITO 2 2. THE ASSESSEE STATED IN THE APPLICATION THAT NO - BODY COULD APPEARED IN THE HEARING AT THE APPELLATE STAGE BECAUSE THE CASE PAPERS RELATING TO THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WERE RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AT AHMEDABAD ON LY ON 23/09/2016. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT BECAUSE OF WORK PRESSURE HIS CA COULD NOT SEND THE CASE PAPERS TIMELY TO THE ADVOCATE AS A RESULT COMPLIANCE COULD NOT BE MADE. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE REASONS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT ATTENDING THE HEARING IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED TO BE BONA FIDE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACT THAT THE C.A. OF THE ASSESSEE WAS BASED AT SURAT AND THE ADVOCATE OF THE ASSSES SEE WAS OPERATING FROM AHMEDABAD. THEREFORE, WE ALLOW THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE APPEAL OF THE ASSSESSEE FOR ADJUDICATION ON 20/07/2017 . THIS DATE WAS INFORMED TO BOTH THE PARTIES , THEREFORE, NO NOTICE WILL BE ISSUED. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 18 - 04 - 201 7 SD/ - SD/ - ( RAJPAL YADAV ) ( AMARJIT SINGH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 18 /04 /2017 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE M.A. 181/AHD/2016 (IN I.T.A NO. 22/AHD/2014) A.Y. 2008 - 09 PAGE NO INDRAJEET ZANDUSINGH TOMAR VS. ITO 3 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, IT AT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,