PIYUSH VIRANI, V. JTCIT SP RG 49,

MA 27/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8827 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 1995-1996
• Appeal Filed On: 15-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BABAN D P ATEL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, C, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL, JM AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, AM M.A. NO. 27/MUM/2012 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 3631/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 1995-96) SHRI PIYUSH VIRANI, 1/10, 3 RD FLOOR, JETHALAL MANSION, BANK STREET,, CROSS LANE, FORT, MUMBAI 400 001. PAN: ABJPV 2920 Q JT. C.I.T., SP. RANGE -49, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI. APPLICANT V/S RESPONDENT DATE OF HEARING : 06- 07-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06-07-201 2 APPLICANT BY : MS. HIRALI DESAI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI BABAN D. P ATEL O R D E R PER DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL (JM) THIS MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR TH E A.Y. 1995-96 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL I N ITA NO. 3631/MUM/2010 DTD. 18-04-2011. 2. THE APPLICANT IN THE MISC. APPLICATION DTD. 18-0 1-2012 SUPPORTED BY AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI PIYUSH VIRANI, STATED IN PARA 5 & 6 OF THE AFFIDAVIT AS UNDER:- 5. I SAY THAT, THEREAFTER, SOMEWHERE IN JUNE 2010, I SHIFTED MY OFFICE TO 1/10, 3 RD FLOOR, JETHALAL MANSION, BANK STREET, CROSS LANE, FORT, MUMBAI 400 001. 6. I SAY THAT THIS CHANGE IN THE OFFICE ADDRESS WAS INTIMATED TO THE OFFICE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN WHOSE CHARGE MY RETURN OF INCOME IS FILED. HOWEVER, MA 27/MUM/2012 2 INADVERTENTLY AND THROUGH OVERSIGHT, IT ESCAPED MY NOTICE THAT SIMILAR INTIMATION WAS REQUIRED TO BE SENT TO THE HONBLE I TAT. IT WAS, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE EX-PARTE ORDE R PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL BE RECALLED. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT FOR THE REASONS AS MENTIONED IN ASSESSEES MISC. APPLIC ATION SUPPORTED BY AFFIDAVIT, THE EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNA L BE RECALLED, WHICH WAS NOT SERIOUSLY OBJECTED TO BY THE LD. D.R. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE RIVAL PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AFTER HA VING SATISFIED ABOUT THE REASONS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND CONSIDERING T HE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE OR HIS AUTHORIZE D REPRESENTATIVE ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND ACCORDINGLY THE EX-PARTE ORDER DTD. 18-04-2011 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS RECALLED. PARTIES ARE TO APPEAR WI THOUT WAITING FOR ANY NOTICE ON 10-09-2012 . ACCORDINGLY THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE AS SESSEE IS ALLOWED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6 TH JULY, 2012. SD/- SD/- (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) (DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 6 TH JULY, 2012 RK.: MA 27/MUM/2012 3 COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT , CONCERNED, MUMBAI 4. CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI 5. DR G BENCH 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI