PANKAJ PARIKH & CO., V. ITO WD 24(3)(2),

MA 248/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3864 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-07-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 13-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MAYANK PRIYADARSHI
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJAY SHAH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH C MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI T.R.SOOD, AM & SHRI V.DURGA RAO, AM M.A.NO.248/MUM/2010 - A.Y 2005-06 [ARISING OUT OF I.T.A.NO.3424/MUM/09] M/S PANKAJ PARIKH & CO., 201, ANDUMBER APARTMENTS, 1227, V.S.RD., PRABHADEVI, MUMBAI 400 025. PAN NO.AAAFP 2328 N VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 24(3)(7), MUMBAI. (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI SANJAY SHAH. REVENUE BY : SHRI MAYANK PRIYADARSHI. O R D E R PER T.R.SOOD, AM: THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ASSESSEE HA S SOUGHT RECALLING OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 18/2/2 010 IN I.T.A.NO.3424/M/09, THROUGH WHICH ASSESSEES APPEAL HAS BEEN DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 2. THE LD.COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT AF TER THE DEMISE OF ONE OF THE PARTNERS LATE SHRI PANKAJ PARIKH, MRS . JYOSTNA HARIKRISHNA PARIKH WAS MADE A PARTNER. HOWEVER, THE TAX MATTERS BEING LOOKED AFTER BY MISS BARKHA PARIKH, DAUGHTER OF THE DECEAS ED PARTNER, WHO IS ALSO WORKING IN A PRIVATE COMPANY, ON THE DATE WHEN NOTICE WAS TO BE SERVED HAD GONE TO OFFICE AND SINCE MRS. JYOSTNA H. PARIKH WAS ALONE AT HOME AND BECAUSE OF HER OLD AGE, SHE DID NOT OPE N THE DOOR TO THE POSTMAN AND THAT IS WHY NOTICE COULD NOT BE SERVED. SINCE EFFECTIVE 2 OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING HAS BEEN DENIED, HE MADE A P RAYER THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL SHOULD BE RECALLED. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD.DR, RELIED ON THE ORD ER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ATTEND THE PROCEEDINGS BECAUSE O F SUFFICIENT CAUSE. AS THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DENIED AN OPPORTUNITY OF H EARING, WE RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN I.T.A.NO.3424/MUM/09. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL ON 26-8-2 010. THE ASSESSEE SHOULD TAKE NOTICE FROM THIS ORDER ITSELF AS NO SEP ARATE NOTICE WILL BE ISSUED. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS ALLO WED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 9 TH DAY OF JULY, 2010. SD/- SD/- (V.DURGA RAO) (T.R.SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI: 9 TH JULY, 2010. P/-* 3