BAMAN KDB MEHTA, MUMBAI V. DCIT RG 4(1)(1), MUMBAI

MA 22/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6627 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 31-05-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 12-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V VIDHYADHAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH SMC , MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH , JUDICIAL MEMBER MA NO. 22/MUM/2017 (OUT OF ITA NO. 3657 /MUM/201 5) : (A.Y : 20 10 - 11 ) MR. BAMAN KDB MEHTA 1205 - 06, REGENT CHAMBERS, 208, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI 400 021 (APPELLANT) PAN : AAEPM3854C VS. DCIT, RANGE - 4(1)(1), MUMBAI (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI RYAN SALDANHA RESPONDENT S BY : SHRI V. VIDHYADHAR DATE OF HEARING : 25 / 05/ 201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31 /0 5 /201 8 O R D E R PER G.S. PANNU , AM : BY WAY OF THE CAPTIONED APPLICATION, APPLICANT HAS SOUGHT RECALLING OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL DATED 05.07.2016 ON THE GROUND THAT FOR UNINTENDED AND REASONS BEYOND HIS CONTROL, ASSESSEE COULD NOT PUT IN APPEARANCE AT THE TIME OF HEARING AND, THER EFORE, THE APPEAL WAS DISPOSED OFF EX PARTE . 2 MA NO. 22/MUM/2017 MR. BAMAN KDB MEHTA 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE SUPPORTED THE APPLICATION BY POINTING OUT THAT THOUGH THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS RECEIVED AT THE ASSESSEES RESIDENCE ON 08.06.2016, THE SAME WAS INADVERTEN TLY MISPLACED AT HIS RESIDENCE AND, THEREFORE, THE DATE OF HEARING ON 05.07.2016 COULD NOT BE INTIMATED TO THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE. THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS EXPECTING THE HEARING OF APPEAL ON 20.02.2017, A DATE ME NTIONED IN THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CUM NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ITAT. FOR THIS REASON, ASSESSEE WAS NOT EXPECTING THE NOTICE OF HEARING IN 2016 AND, IN ANY CASE, DUE TO INADVERTENT MISPLAC EMENT AT HIS RESIDENCE, THE APPELLANT COULD NOT BE REPRESENTED ON THE APPOI NTED DATE OF HEARING. 3. IT IS, THEREFORE, CANVASSED THAT THE EX PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL BE RECALLED AND THE APPEAL RESTORED FOR DISPOSAL AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND, IN SUPPORT, HE HAS RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN T HE CASE OF CIT VS ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD., 274 ITR 131 (DELHI). 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. DR HAS NOT DISPUTED THE BONA FIDES OF THE REASONS CANVASSED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON - APPEARANCE ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING. 5. HAVING CONSID ERED THE RIVAL STANDS, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO RECALL THE EX PARTE ORDER PASSED EARLIER ON 05.07.2016 AND RESTORE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR HEARING AFRESH BY A REGULAR BENCH. THE PARTIES WERE INFORMED THAT THE DATE OF HEARING WOULD BE 12.07.2018 . SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED AT THE TIME OF HEARING IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH 3 MA NO. 22/MUM/2017 MR. BAMAN KDB MEHTA THE PARTIES, THE REQUIREMENT OF ISSUANCE OF NOTICE OF HEARING IS HEREBY DISPENSED WITH. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 3 1 S T MAY, 2018. SD/ - SD/ - (MAHAVIR SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER (G.S. PANNU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE : 3 1 S T MAY, 2018 *SSL* COPY TO : 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4) THE CIT CONCERNED 5) THE D.R, SMC BENCH, MUMBAI 6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T, MUMBAI