RAJESH RAJMANI SINGH, V. ITO 22(2)4,

MA 270/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9875 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 11-01-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Bonafide belief

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH D BENCH BEFORE SHRI B.R.MITTAL(JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJENDRA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) M.A. NO.270/MUM/2012 (ARISING OUT O F ITA NO.3861/MUM/2011) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 MR. RAJESH RAJMANI SINGH, 1/1, GHANSHYAM BAUG, CAMA LANE, HANSOTI ROAD, GHATKOPAR (W), MUMBAI PA NO.AAGPS 1439 P ITO 22(2)-4, MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) VS. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI MOHIT JAIN DATE OF HEARING: 11.1.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 11 .1.2013 ORDER PER B.R.MITTAL, JM: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATI ON U/S.254(2) OF THE ACT WITH THE PRAYER TO RECALL ITAT ORDER DATED 12 TH MARCH, 2012 IN I.T.A. NO.3861/M/2011 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 STATING THAT THE TRIBUNAL P ASSED THE EXPARTE ORDER AS ASSESSEE COULD NOT PUT APPEARANCE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSE WHEN THE MATT ER WAS CALLED ON FOR HEARING. HOWEVER, WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE MISCELLANEOUS APP LICATION EXPARTE AFTER HEARING LD D.R. M.A. NO.270/MUIM/20123 (ARISING OUT O F ITA NO.3861/MUM/2011) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 2 3. IN THE PETITION, ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS ALSO STATED IN THE PETITION THAT THE APPEAL WAS FILED THROUGH HIS COUNSEL AND HE WAS REQUIRED TO LOOK AFT ER THE APPEAL. HOWEVER, THE COUNSEL COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE FI XED FOR HEARING NOR HE COMMUNICATED SUCH DATE OF HEARING TO ASSESSEE. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT HE WAS UNDER BONAFIDE BELIEF THAT THE MATTER WILL BE PROPERLY ATTENDED BY HIS COUNSEL . IN VIEW OF THIS, IT IS PRAYED TO RECALL THE EXPARTE ORDER DT.12.3.2012 AND THE APPEAL BE F IXED FOR HEARING ON MERITS. ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT IN THIS REGARD. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE CONTENTS OF MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION AND SUBMISSIONS OF LD D.R. CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE A RE SATISFIED THAT NON-APPEARANCE OF ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF HEARING WAS DUE TO A REASON ABLE CAUSE. WE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, RECALL THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL DATED 12.3.20 12 AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO FIX THE APPEAL IN DUE COURSE BEFORE D BENCH. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED B Y ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH JANUARY, 2013 (RAJENDRA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (B.R. MITTAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 11 TH JANUARY, 2013 PARIDA COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),XXII, MUMB AI 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, XXII , MUMBAI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH D MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI