VINODA CHANDRAHAS SHETTY, V. ITO 14(3)(2),

MA 221/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0962 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-08-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 20-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: B N RAO
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

, , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL F BENCH, MUMBAI , !' !' !' !' , # # # # $ %& $ %& $ %& $ %& , ,, , ' !' ' !' ' !' ' !' ( ( ( ( BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER )#)# #!* . / M.A. NO.221/MUM./2013 ( . / ITA NO. 398/MUM./2012 ) ( '* , #-, / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200809 ) MRS. VINODA CHANDRAHAS SHETTY PICKET CROSS LANE MUMBAI 400 002 .. ./ / APPELLANT * V/S INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD14(3)(2), MUMBAI .... 01./ / RESPONDENT '. . / PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER ABDP58862N '* ,3$ 4 5 / ASSESSEE BY : MR. B.N. RAO '# 4 5 / REVENUE BY : MS. NEERAJA PRADHAN *# 4 $ / DATE OF HEARING 23.08.2013 !% 67- 4 $ / DATE OF ORDER 23.08.2013 !% !% !% !% / ORDER $ %& $ %& $ %& $ %& , ,, , ' !' ' !' ' !' ' !' 8 8 8 8 / PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M. BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE ASSES SEE SEEKS RECALL OF THE IMPUGNED EXPARTE ORDER DATED 14 TH JANUARY 2013, PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH, IN ITA NO.398/MUM./2012, FO R ASSESSMENT YEAR 200809. 3 . THE HEARING WAS SCHEDULED ON 14 TH JANUARY 2013 BEFORE F BENCH. THE NAME OF THE APPELLANT HAS NOT APPEARED CORRECTLY IN THE CAUSE LIST DUE TO MRS. VINODA CHANDRAHAS SHETTY 2 WHICH MY REPRESENTATIVES WERE NOT IN A POSITION TO REPRESENT THE CASE, THOUGH THEY WERE PRESENT IN THE SAME COURT ROOM ON THE DAY FOR THEIR OTHER MATTER WHICH WAS PROPERLY ATTENDED BY THEM. 4. SINCE IT WAS NOT AN INTENDED NONATTENDANCE, THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HONBLE BENCH SHALL BE RECA LLED AND APPEAL MAY BE RESTORED. 2. THE LEARNED COUNSEL, ACCORDINGLY, SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT IN VIEW OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES EXPLAINED ABOVE, THE ASSESSEE BE GRANTED ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. AN AFFIDAVIT DULY SWORN BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL, MR. B.N. RAO, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, HIMSELF IN SUPPORT OF HIS APPLICATION I S ALSO AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LEARNED COUNSEL, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE ASSESSE E WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE FROM APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND, HENCE , THE APPEAL BE RESTORED FOR HEARING ON MERIT. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESEN TATIVE, ON THE OTHER HAND, DID NOT OBJECT FOR CALLING OF THE IMPUGNED EXPARTE ORD ER. 3. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND ON PERUSAL OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, WE HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT HE WAS PREVENTED BY A REASONABLE CAUSE FROM APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE OF HEARING. CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE PROVISO TO RULE-24 OF THE INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963, WE RECALL THE EXPARTE ORDER DATED 14TH JANUARY 2013 , PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO F IX THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 24 TH SEPTEMBER 2013. SINCE THIS DATE OF HEARING IS ANNOU NCED IN THE OPEN COURT, THE REQUIREMENT OF SENDING NOTICE TO THE PARTIES IS HER EBY DISPENSED WITH. 4. 3 $9 '* ,3$ 4 )#)# #!* '#$ : * $ ; < 4. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES M.A. IS TREATED AS ALL OWED. !% 4 7- = >!*9 23 RD AUGUST 2013 7 4 ? < ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23 RD AUGUST 2013 SD/- !' !' !' !' RAJENDRA SINGH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- $ $ $ $ %& %& %& %& ' !' ' !' ' !' ' !' AMIT SHUKLA JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, >!* >!* >!* >!* DATED: 23 RD AUGUST 2013 MRS. VINODA CHANDRAHAS SHETTY 3 !% 4 0'$) @)-$ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : (1) '* ,3$ / THE ASSESSEE; (2) '# / THE REVENUE; (3) A () / THE CIT(A); (4) A / THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; (5) )#D? 0'$'* , , / THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI; (6) ?E, / GUARD FILE. 1)$ 0'$ / TRUE COPY !%* / BY ORDER 0! . FG / PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY #3H '* F# / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY I / / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI