SUREKHA FINANCE, V. ITO WD 8(3)(2),

MA 205/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3827 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 11-06-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 1996-1997
• Appeal Filed On: 20-03-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AARASI PRASAD
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES A, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. D.K. AGARWAL (J.M.) AND SHRI. J.SUDHAK AR REDDY (A.M.) M.A. NO.205/MUM/2009 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.1756/MUM/2004 ) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1996-1997 M/S. SUREKHA FINANCE LIMITED 13, CONCORD APT., BULLOCK RD., BANDRA(W), MUMBAI. PAN : AAACS6344N VS. ITO, WARD 8(3)(2) MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE. DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI. AARASI PRASAD (DR) O R D E R PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M. THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE, REQUESTING THE TRIBUNAL TO RECALL ITS ORIGINAL ORDER DATED 16.08.2 007 AND DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS BASED ON THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WHICH AR E ON RECORD. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE THE ISSUE OF REPEATED NOTICES BY RPAD. THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HA S BEEN POSTED ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS FROM JULY, 2009 ONWARDS AND ON NO NE OF THE OCCASIONS, ARM PERSON APPEARED NOR THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT AN ADJU DICATION. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCE, WE DISPOSE OF THE CASE EX-PARTE ON MERIT, QUA THE ASSESSEE, AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED D.R. 3. HEARD THE LEARNED DR. THE ASSESSEE IN ITS MISCE LLANEOUS APPLICATION ACCEPTED THE FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL, THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND HAS NOT BROUGHT ON RECORD THE OUTCOME OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-1998 , AS CORRECT. IN OTHER M.A. NO.205/MUM/2009 A.Y.: 1996-1997 2 WORDS, THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THESE OBSERVATIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ORDER DATED 16.08.2007. HENCE THERE IS NO RECTIFICATION POSSIBLE. 4. THUS THE REQUEST FOR RECALLING AND RE-ADJUDICATI ON THE APPEAL IN THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, IS NOT WITHIN THE PREVIE W OF SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT. REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON APPEARANCE IS ALSO NOT PLEADED. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE DISMISSED THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION AS DEVOID OF MERIT. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 11 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2010. SD/- (D.K. AGARWAL) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) SD/- (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) MUMBAI, DATED 11 TH JUNE, 2010. JANHAVI COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXI, MUMBA I 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CITY-XXI, MUMBAI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH E, MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI