BHARAT HEMRAJ JETHANI, V. DCIT CEN CIR-1,

MA 213/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3576 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 14-05-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 30-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B K SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: M SUBRAMANIAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH B : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.K. AGARWAL, (JM) AND SHRI R.K. PANDA , (AM) MA NO.213/MUM/2010 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.4631/MUM/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 MR. BHARAT HEMRAJ JETHANI 103, SIDHARTA TOWERS KOPRI COLONY THANE(E) . ..( APPLICANT ) P.A. NO. (ABDPJ 4125 J) VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 PAWAR INDL. ESTATE EDJULI ROAD, CHERAI THANE(W). ..( RESPONDENT ) APPLICANT BY : SHRI M. SUBRAMANIAN RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B. K. SINGH O R D E R PER D.K. AGARWAL (JM). THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECT ED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29.9.2009 PASSED BY THE TRIBU NAL IN ITA NO.4631/MUM/2008 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 2. THE APPLICANT ASSESSEE VIDE HIS PETITION DATED NIL SU PPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 25.3.2010 INTERALIA STATED ON OAT H THAT : MA NO.213/M/10 A.Y:05-06 2 3. I SAY THAT I DULY INTIMATED THE DATE OF HEARING OF 25.09.2009 TO MY ADVOCATE MR. RAJESH MOD I. 4. I SAY THAT MR. RAJESH MODI INFORMED ME ONLY IN THE MORNING OF 25.09.2009 THAT HE WOULD NOT BE A BLE TO ATTEND THE HEARING BEFORE THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL AN D THEREFORE I IMMEDIATELY SENT A TELEGRAM ADDRESSED T O THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI. IT WAS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE EXPARTE ORDER PASSE D BY THE TRIBUNAL BE RECALLED. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE SUBMITS THAT FOR THE REASONS MENTIONED IN ASSESSEES APPLICATION, THE EXPARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL BE RECALLED WHICH WAS NOT O BJECTED TO BY THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE RI VAL PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AFTER HAVING SATISFIED ABOUT THE REASONS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE RE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE OR HIS A UTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND ACCORDINGLY THE EXPARTE ORDER DATED 29.09.2009 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS RECALL ED. PARTIES ARE TO APPEAR WITHOUT WAITING FOR ANY NOTICE ON 8.7.2010 AS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION STANDS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14.5.2010. SD/- SD/- (R.K. PANDA) ( D.K. AGARWAL ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 14.5.2010. JV. MA NO.213/M/10 A.Y:05-06 3 COPY TO: THE APPLICANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR BENCH TRUE COPY BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI. DETAILS DATE INITIALS DESIGNATION 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 7.5.10 SR.PS/PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 10.5.10 SR.PS/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/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON 14.5.10 SR.PS/PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 17.5.10 SR.PS/PS 8 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER