Jyoti Ltd., Baroda V. The ACIT., Circle-1(2), Baroda

MA 252/AHD/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0634 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 03-12-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 24-09-2018
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

, D IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SMT. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMEBR MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NOS. 252 TO 256/AHD/2018- AY 2002- 03, 2003-04, 2005-06, 2007-08 & 2009-10 ( IN I.T.A. NOS. 3010/AHD/2013, 930, 2079, 1352 & 135 3/AHD/2014 - AY 2002-03, 2003-04, 2005-06, 2007-08 & 2009-10 ) JYOTI LIMITED NANUBHAI AMIN MARG INDUSTRIAL AREA BARODA 390 003 / VS. THE ASST.CIT CIRCLE-1(2) BARODA / / PAN/GIR NO. : AAACJ4909N ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI JIMI PATEL, A.R. / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI LALIT JAIN, SR. D.R. / DATE OF HEARING 16/11/2018 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 03/12/2018 / O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM: THESE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF ASSESSEE SEEKING RECTIFICATION OF THE C OMMON ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NOS. 3010/AHD/2013, 930, 2079, 1352 & 1353/AHD /2014, ORDER DATED 21.02.2018 PASSED BY TH E TRIBUNAL UNDER S.254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; (THE AC T). M.A. NOS. 252 TO 256/AHD/18 [JYOTI LIMITED VS. ACIT] - 2 - 2. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, THE LEAR NED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN PASSED EX PARTE FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF ITAT, DELHI BENCH, IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DELHI) AND THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED IN LIM INE OWING TO NON-ATTENDANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS REGARD, THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THEY HAD FILED A COMBINED ADJOURN MENT APPLICATION BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND WERE UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THEY HAD ALREADY FILED A LETTER OF AUTHORITY WHILE FILING THE ABOVE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BUT IT TURNED OUT TO BE A MISUNDERSTANDING ON THEIR PART. THE NON APPEARANCE WAS ON ACCOUNT OF REASONS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE APPLICANT. IT WAS NOT PURPOSEFUL. THEREFORE, LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED ON 21.02.2018. IT WAS THUS SUBMITTED THAT SUFFICIENT CAUSE EXISTS FOR NON APPEARANCE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IT WAS THEREFORE URGED THAT E ARLIER APPEALS IN ITA NOS. 3010/AHD/2013, 930, 2079, 1352 & 1353/AHD/ 2014, PRONOUNCED ON 21.02.2018 BE RECALLED AND REFIXED FO R HEARING ON REGULAR DATE FOR REDRESSAL OF GRIEVANCE ON MERITS A S RAISED IN THESE APPEALS. 3. LEARNED DR SIMPLY RELIED UPON THE FACTS ON RECOR D. 4. IN VIEW OF THE REASONS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE , WE FIND SUFFICIENT CAUSE EXISTS FOR RECTIFICATION OF ERROR. ACCORDINGLY, WE RECALL THE ORDER OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TR IBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE IN ITA NOS. 3010/AHD/2013, 930, 2079, 1 352 & 1353/AHD/2014, DATED 21.02.2018. THE REGISTRY IS D IRECTED TO FIX THE AFORESAID APPEALS SO RECALLED ON 04.03.2019 FOR FRESH HEARING. BOTH THE PARTIES WERE SUITABLY INFORMED IN THE COUR T AND M.A. NOS. 252 TO 256/AHD/18 [JYOTI LIMITED VS. ACIT] - 3 - ACCORDINGLY THE NOTICE OF HEARING IS DISPENSED WITH THE CONSENT OF BOTH THE PARTIES. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. SD/- SD/- ( MADHUMITA ROY) (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 03/12/2018 TRUE COPY S. K. SINHA ! / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- & / REVENUE 2 / ASSESSEE ( ) *+ , / CONCERNED CIT 4 ,- / CIT (A) / 012 33*+4 *+#4 56) / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 7 289 : / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / 4 / 5 *+#4 56) THIS ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03 /12/2018