SHRI. BHARAT K SHAH, Mumbai V. ACIT-19(1), Mumbai

MA 205/MUM/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0797 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 29-09-2022
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 25-07-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHINTAMANI V
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. No. 205/Mum/2022 (A.Y. 2009-10) (Arising out of I.T.A. No.2379/Mum/2019) (A.Y. 2009-10) Bharat Kanaiyalal Shah 1101-A, 11 th Floor, Tirupati, Bhulabhai Desai Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai- 400004 PAN AOWPS8142R Vs. ACIT-19(1) Matru Mandir, Tardeo Mumbai- 400007 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Suchek Anchaliya Department by Shri Chintamani V. Divgankar Date of Hearing 30.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 14.10.2022 O R D E R Per AMARJIT SINGH (AM) :- The assessee has filed miscellaneous application u/s 254(2) of the Act on 26-07-2022 against the order of ITAT in the case of the assessee vide ITA No. 2379/ Mum/2019 dated 31-03-2022. In the miscellaneous application the assessee submitted that the assessee had applied for adjournment of hearing but same could not be delivered to the ITAT because of sending the same to the incorrect email by the earlier representative of the assessee. Therefore, during the course of appellate proceeding the assessee could not make necessary compliance therefore the ITAT had passed the impugned order at 31-03-2022 ex-party. The Ld. M.A. No. 205/Mum/2022 Bharat K Shah 2 Counsel requested for giving one more opportunity for adjudicating this appeal of the assessee on merit after hearing the side of the assessee. 2. Heard both aside and perused the material on the record. The appeal of the assessee was adjudicated vide ITA No. 2379 2019 on 31-03-2022 after taking into consideration the submission of the Ld. D.R. and material on record since no compliance was made from the side of the assessee. After taking into consideration the submission of the Ld. Counsel that necessary compliance could not be made because of ill health of earlier counsel and sending of email for adjournment to wrong address we observe that there is bonafide cause for not making compliance to the hearing, therefore we recall the ex-parties order passed on 31-03-2022 for adjudicating a fresh in accordance with rule 24 of the ITAT Rule. The registry is directed to list this course of hearing in the due course on 15-11-2011. Both the parties have been informed about aforesaid date of hearing of the case, therefore, no separate notice for hearing will be issued. Accordingly the miscellaneous application of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 14.10.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (Kavitha Rajagopal) (Amarjit Singh) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated : 14/10/2022 ANIKET RAJPUT (STENOGRAPHER) M.A. No. 205/Mum/2022 Bharat K Shah 3 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard File. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai