BABAJ BHAVAN OWNERS PREMISES CO-OP. SOCIETY LTD, V. ITO WD 12(1)(1),

MA 188/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3580 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 14-05-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 24-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: APPLICANT
• Assessee Lawyers: NON E SHRI M OHD USMAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH B,MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN (VICE-PRESIDENT) & SHRI R.K. PANDA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) M.A.NO.188/MUM/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.1298/MUM/2008) (A.Y. 2004-05)) BAJAJ BHAVAN OWNERS PREMISES CHS LTD., 220, JAMNALAL BAJAJ RD., NARIMAN POINT,MUMBAI-400 021. PAN: AAAJB0644H VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 12(3)(1), ROOM NO.102,AAYKAR BHAVAN, M.K.RD., MUMBAI-400 020. APPLICANT BY RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY NON E. RESPONDENT BY SHRI M OHD. USMAN. O R D E R PER D. MANMOHAN, VICE-PRESIDENT: BY THIS APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY SEEKS REC ALL OF THE ORDER DATED 23-07-2009 ON THE GROUND THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT REASON FOR THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BUT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE R EASONS IN TIME WHICH RESULTED IN DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL BY WAY OF PASSING AN EX PARTE ORDER AND THUS THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL REQUIRES TO BE RECALLED UNDER RULE 24 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES. THOUGH NOTICE WAS SENT BY RPAD (AD CARD ON R ECORD), NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. EVEN AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE APPEAL, NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE. UNDER THE SAID BACKGROUND, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE MISC. APPLICATION EX PARTE, QUA THE ASSESSEE. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. D.R. AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE RECORD. ADMITTEDLY, THERE IS A DELAY OF 45 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL AN D DESPITE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR THE DELA Y, THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY DID NOT BRING ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD WHICH RESULTED IN DISP OSAL OF THE APPEAL EX PARTE WHEREIN THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED AS UNADMITTED. MA 188/M/10 BAJAJ BHAVAN OWNERS PREMISES CHS LTD. 2 3. IN THE MISC. APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT THE POWER OF ATTORNEY OF SHRI RAJIV BENGALI IS ALREADY ON RECORD BUT THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY HAVING APPOINTED MR. SALIL KAPOOR AND MR. GOPAL AS THEIR A TTORNEYS, A TECHNICAL ERROR WAS COMMITTED BY NOT FILING THEIR RESPECTIVE POWER OF A TTORNEY. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT ON MERITS THE ASSESSEE HAS A GOOD CASE AND THE RE WAS A JUSTIFIABLE CASE FOR THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL WHICH COULD NOT BE B ROUGHT ON RECORD AT THE TIME OF FILING THE APPEAL. 4. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE BENCH HAVING ALRE ADY TAKEN A CONSCIOUS DECISION OF THE REASONS FOR THE DELAY, BY STATING T HAT DESPITE A DEFECT MEMO THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY DID NOT COME FORWARD TO EXPLAIN TH E REASONS FOR THE DELAY, RE- CONSIDERING THE SAME ISSUE IN A MISC. APPLICATION W OULD AMOUNT TO REVIEW OF THE MATTER WHICH IS NOT PERMISSIBLE U/S.254(2) OF THE A CT. SINCE WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING AND ALSO BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED AS UNADMITTED ON ACCOUNT OF THE DEFECTS POINTED OUT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE MISC. APPLICATION FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY. ACCORDINGLY, THE MISC. APPLICATION IS REJECTED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 14TH DAY OF MAY, 2010. SD/- SD/- (R.K. PANDA) (D. MANMOHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT MUMBAI: 14TH MAY , 2010. MA 188/M/10 BAJAJ BHAVAN OWNERS PREMISES CHS LTD. 3 COPY TO : 1.APPLICANT. 2.DEPARTMENT. 3 CIT(A)-XII,MUMBAI. 4 CIT-XII,MUMBAI. 5.DR,B BENCH,MUMBAI. 6.MASTER FILE. (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER, NG: ASST.REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI. MA 188/M/10 BAJAJ BHAVAN OWNERS PREMISES CHS LTD. 4 DETAILS DATE INITIALS DESIGNATION 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 7-5-10 SR.PS/ 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 11-5-10 SR.PS/ 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/ 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS/ 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS/ 8 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER