UMESH AMBIKAPRASAD MISHRA, Mumbai V. ITO 10(3)(3), Mumbai

MA 196/MUM/2023

AI Insights

Mr. Umesh Mishra filed a Miscellaneous Application seeking recall of the Tribunal's order dated 12.05.2022, which was passed ex-parte due to his non-appearance. The non-appearance was caused by a change in his address, leading to non-receipt of the hearing notice. The Tribunal, referencing the decision in Daryapur Shetkari Sahkari Ginning and Pressing Factory v. ACIT, accepted that the limitation period for filing the application should be counted from the end of the month in which the order came to the knowledge of the assessee. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the recall of the order and directed the case to be re-heard.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 123484 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 18-05-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 23-02-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Daryapur Shetkari Sahkari Ginning and Pressing Factory v. ACIT [2021] 123 taxmann.com 301 (Bombay)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Period of limitation
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) M.A. No. 196/MUM/2023 (Arising out of ITA No. 4620/MUM/2019) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Mr. Umesh Mishra, 1801, Ambrosia, Orchard Avenue Powai, Mumbai-400076. Vs. The ITO-10(3)(3), Room No. 213, 2 nd floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAGPM 0190 F Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri S.L. Jain Revenue by : Shri Sridhar G. Menon Date of Hearing : 19/05/2023 Date of pronouncement : 19/07/2023 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM By way of this Miscellaneous Application, the assessee is seeking recall/rectification in the order of the Tribunal dated 12.05.2022 passed in ITA No. 1848/Mum/2018 for assessment year 2011-12 and ITA No. 4620/Mum/2019 for assessment year 2012-13. 2. Before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee addressing the defect memo of delay that in the case, order of the Tribunal was not obtained by the assessee from the office of the Tribunal in the month of August 2022. He submitted that order of the Tribunal came to the knowledge of the a and therefore period of limitation of six month from the end of the month of the August,2022. 3. We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue of limitation in filing the Miscellaneous section 254(2) of the prescribed period of limitation of six month month in which order o the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the ca Sahkari Ginning and Pressing Factory v. ACIT [2021] 123 taxmann.com 301 (Bombay the purpose of limitation of filing Miscellaneous Application should be counted from end of the month in whi Tribunal came to the knowledge of the Therefore, respectfully following the finding of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court (supra), same being within the limitation period adjudication. Before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee addressing the defect memo of delay of 85 days in filing the application order of the Tribunal was not served obtained by the assessee from the office of the Tribunal in the month of August 2022. He submitted that order of the Tribunal came to the knowledge of the assessee in month of August 2022 and therefore period of limitation of six months should be counted end of the month of the August,2022. We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue of limitation in filing the Miscellaneous Application. W section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act,1961( in shot ‘the Act’) prescribed period of limitation of six months from the end of the month in which order of the Tribunal has been passed, h the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Daryapur Shetkari Sahkari Ginning and Pressing Factory v. ACIT [2021] 123 taxmann.com 301 (Bombay) has held that period of six month the purpose of limitation of filing Miscellaneous Application should be counted from end of the month in which the order of the e to the knowledge of the appellant or respondent espectfully following the finding of the Hon’ble Bombay there is no delay in filing the being within the limitation period, it is admitted for Mr. Umesh Mishra 2 M.A No. 196/Mum/2023 Before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee addressing the the application, submitted served and it was obtained by the assessee from the office of the Tribunal in the month of August 2022. He submitted that order of the Tribunal ssessee in month of August 2022 should be counted We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue of cation. We find that ,1961( in shot ‘the Act’) has from the end of the f the Tribunal has been passed, however, Daryapur Shetkari Sahkari Ginning and Pressing Factory v. ACIT [2021] 123 has held that period of six months for the purpose of limitation of filing Miscellaneous Application should the order of the appellant or respondent. espectfully following the finding of the Hon’ble Bombay there is no delay in filing the application and is admitted for 3.1 The Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that due in address of the assessee from B/401/402, Raheha Sherwood, Behind Hub Mall, Western Express Highway, Goregaon (E), 1801, new address i.e. Ambrosia, Orch notice for the hearing dated 12.05.2022 could not be received by the assessee and consequently before the Tribunal, therefore the assessee. The Ld. Counsel of of the Tribunal might be recalled and the assessee is willing to argue its appeal on merit. 4. We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in dispute and perused the relevant material on record. Due in address of the assessee hearing dated 12.05.2022 could not be received by the assessee and therefore no representation was made by the assessee before the Tribunal on the date of the hearing. sufficient cause for non the hearing, therefore invoking Rule 24 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 appeal of the assessee is recalled for deciding afresh. The Registry is directed to fix the appeal for hear to parties. The assessee is required to revise it incorporating the new address. The grounds raised in the Miscellaneous Application are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. The Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that due in address of the assessee from B/401/402, Raheha Sherwood, Behind Hub Mall, Western Express Highway, Goregaon (E), 1801, Ambrosia, Orchard Avenue Powai, Mumbai, the notice for the hearing dated 12.05.2022 could not be received by consequently, no representation could be made Tribunal, therefore, the order was passed ex . The Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that order of the Tribunal might be recalled and the assessee is willing to argue its appeal on merit. We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in dispute and perused the relevant material on record. Due in address of the assessee, the notice issued by the Tribunal for the hearing dated 12.05.2022 could not be received by the assessee and therefore no representation was made by the assessee before the Tribunal on the date of the hearing. In our opinion sufficient cause for non-appearance by the assessee on the date of therefore invoking Rule 24 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 appeal of the assessee is recalled for deciding afresh. The Registry is directed to fix the appeal for hearing in due course under intimation to parties. The assessee is required to revise it’s Form No. 36 incorporating the new address. The grounds raised in the Miscellaneous Application are accordingly allowed for statistical Mr. Umesh Mishra 3 M.A No. 196/Mum/2023 The Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that due to change in address of the assessee from B/401/402, Raheha Sherwood, Behind Hub Mall, Western Express Highway, Goregaon (E), 1801, to ard Avenue Powai, Mumbai, the notice for the hearing dated 12.05.2022 could not be received by , no representation could be made , the order was passed ex-parte qua the assessee submitted that order of the Tribunal might be recalled and the assessee is willing to We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in dispute and perused the relevant material on record. Due to change the notice issued by the Tribunal for the hearing dated 12.05.2022 could not be received by the assessee and therefore no representation was made by the assessee before the In our opinion, there is a appearance by the assessee on the date of therefore invoking Rule 24 of the ITAT Rules, 1963, the appeal of the assessee is recalled for deciding afresh. The Registry is ing in due course under intimation s Form No. 36 incorporating the new address. The grounds raised in the Miscellaneous Application are accordingly allowed for statistical 5. In the result, the M assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on Sd/ (KULDIP SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 19/07/2023 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed. nounced in the open Court on 19/07/2023. Sd/- Sd/ KULDIP SINGH) (OM PRAKASH KANT JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Mr. Umesh Mishra 4 M.A No. 196/Mum/2023 iscellaneous Application filed by the /07/2023. Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai